Draft Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements (Amendment) Regulations 2026

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 General Committees

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

Thank you for chairing, Mr Twigg, and I apologise for arriving late—I was confused about whether there was another Division in the Chamber. I thank the Government Whip for stepping in and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Grantham and Bourne, for his remarks.

The regulations build on legislation from the previous Government, and we have worked really closely with the sector, which is an important driver of growth in the UK. Great holidays bring so much joy to consumers all over the country, and our reforms are all about strengthening the package—which the hon. Gentleman touched on—for the travel framework, ensuring that consumers continue to benefit from strong protections, while clarifying those obligations to ease the burdens on business, supporting the sector and supporting a healthy and thriving economy.

The shadow Minister asked a couple of questions that I will respond to, first on the cost and the impact on businesses. The policy will deliver a net benefit to business of £19 million over 10 years, with £98 million in costs outweighed by £117 million in savings. The analysis considered a range of sources, including feedback from the consultation.

The best estimate we can point to from published analysis is from the 2023 impact assessment of the Package Travel and Linked Travel Arrangements Regulations 2018, as the hon. Gentleman might know. That analysis estimates that 13,979 UK businesses sell packages. I hope that provides him with clarity on the costs.

[Gareth Davies]

Can the Minister clarify whether she has met any businesses since taking office in this specific industry, and not just relied on the 2023 piece of work?

[Kate Dearden]

I was getting to those points—I thank the hon. Gentleman for the nudge.

[Gareth Davies]

Apologies.

[Kate Dearden]

We have expressed our intention for the regulations to come into force on 6 April 2027. These regulations are commencing next year to give businesses almost a year to implement the changes, and they have been aware of these changes since the Government response in December.

We have been working closely with industry to develop guidance and will continue to do so in the coming months. Officials have already conducted engagement and consulted on the regulation at pace. It is really important for these changes that we work closely with the industry and that it welcomes them. We want to make sure we work closely with the industry on that guidance.

The shadow Minister also asked about the 14-day refund period for businesses. Travel organisers are required to refund consumers within 14 days of cancellation, but sometimes that will be because of a failure from a third party. Introducing a 14-day refund period for businesses from those third parties will create more certainty for travel organisers, helping them to manage cash flow and recover costs. That covers most of his questions, but I am happy to answer any more if he has any. Otherwise, I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Employment Rights Act 2025: Non-disclosure Agreements Consultation

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

We are delivering our plan for change by ensuring employment rights are fit for a modern economy, empowering working people and contributing to economic growth. Our plan to make work pay will extend the employment protections already given by the best British companies to millions more workers across the country.

The Government are making tangible progress in implementing this generational change in employment rights, while ensuring impact on businesses is minimised. Already this April we have: expanded statutory sick pay to up to 1.3 million of the lowest paid employees in society and ensured that it is paid from the first day of sickness absence; supported working families by implementing a day one right to paternity leave and unpaid parental leave; and established the new Fair Work Agency.

Today, we are making further progress in our commitment to protect workers from abuse in the workplace by launching a consultation on non-disclosure agreements. Alongside a programme of direct stakeholder engagement, this consultation will support us in determining how best to put our plans into practice.

Non-disclosure agreements consultation

The Employment Rights Act 2025 introduced a new measure that will address the misuse of NDAs, by employers who want to silence workers about harassment and discrimination in the workplace. While NDAs can have legitimate purposes such as to protect sensitive commercial business interests, they should not be used to cover up workplace misconduct.

The NDA measure will void any provision in an agreement, such as a contract of employment or settlement agreement, between a worker and their employer in so far as it prevents a worker from speaking out about relevant harassment or discrimination. The Government acknowledge that workers may sometimes want confidentiality in cases of harassment or discrimination. We will set conditions in regulations under which NDAs can still be valid (an “excepted agreement”) and will prescribe individuals that a worker with an excepted agreement can still speak to (for example, the police, a doctor, or close family members) subject to consultation. This consultation is split into three parts:

Part 1 seeks views on the Government’s proposed conditions under which an NDA can still be valid in cases of relevant discrimination and harassment, known as an “excepted agreement”. For example, whether a worker should receive “independent advice” on the terms and effect of an excepted agreement, or an explicit time-limited right to withdraw from an excepted agreement without penalty (a cooling-off period).

Part 2 seeks views on who those who have signed an “excepted agreement” should still be able to speak to, known as a “permitted disclosure”. The intention is that where a worker has signed an excepted agreement, they are still able to disclose information relating to relevant harassment and discrimination to certain individuals or bodies to seek advice or support.

Part 3 seeks views on whether this new NDA measure should, in the future, apply to other individuals that may be vulnerable to the misuse of NDAs and who do not meet the standard definition of “worker” in the Employment Rights Act 1996, including certain groups of self- employed.

The Government want to ensure that they protect workers against the misuse of NDAs where employers are using them to cover up relevant harassment and discrimination and to enable workers to have a greater say in whether they want confidentiality and, if they do, a better understanding of what they are agreeing to.

The consultation will run for 12 weeks and close on 8 July 2026. Following consultation, the Government will consider the responses carefully before developing a final policy position. Any changes will be delivered through secondary legislation, with regulations expected to enter into force in 2027.

Next steps

The insights gained through this consultation will be critical to helping the Government to deliver reforms that are both effective and inclusive. It is in everyone’s interest to get the relationship between employer and worker right. This consultation will help us make work pay for both.

[HCWS1513]

Single Status of Worker

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Efford. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders) on securing this debate and on his impassioned contributions throughout it. I know that, as my predecessor, he knows this agenda well. It has been a privilege to continue that work in my role. I was going to talk a lot about our Employment Rights Act and our wider plans to make work pay but in the interests of time I will not; my hon. Friends have covered those subjects exceptionally well and I thank them for that.

The world of work has fundamentally changed in recent years. As we have heard in this debate, it is no longer the norm to stay employed in the same company or even the same sector for a whole lifetime. New technology continues to transform the way that we work, and where and when we work. As the way we work changes, our employment rights legislation, which protects people, has had to be updated. That is what this Government are doing. I thank my hon. Friends for the many excellent points they have made in this debate about how we are working at pace to make sure that the environment for working people is much better than when we found it. My hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough put exceptionally well how working people are already benefiting and seeing the impact that the Employment Rights Act and the other legislation that we have been working on are making.

I agree that to continue to progress in this area it is necessary to change the employment status framework for rights. The growth of the gig economy and growth in insecure work mean that some people are working without the certainty and stability that typical employment provides. The genuinely self-employed play an essential role in driving innovation, creativity and economic growth, and high-quality self-employment is a crucial part of our UK economy. However, vulnerable workers who work day in, day out, often in challenging conditions and for low pay, are not receiving the protections that they should. Their working conditions can be highly controlled by the people or organisations they work for, but they are nevertheless designated as self-employed, with no access to the national minimum wage, paid holidays, a workplace pension or protections from unlawful wage deductions.

The existing employment status framework can also be particularly difficult to understand and enforce. For someone to determine whether they are an employee, a limb (b) worker or genuinely self-employed can require the ability to understand both statute and a significant amount of complex case law. That presents challenges in a system where the onus is on the individual to bring a case to an employment tribunal to establish their employment status. It enables some employers to undercut their competitors—in this debate we heard many examples of that from different sectors—by misleadingly designating their workforce as self-employed when legally they are not, denying people the rights to which they are entitled, and exploiting the financial advantages associated with self-employment.

I thank hon. Members for mentioning the role of the Fair Work Agency on enforcement, and I am happy to continue the discussion outside the Chamber. I am sure that hon. Members will welcome the fact that the Government have set up a dedicated hidden economy team within the Fair Work Agency. From April, it will take action in sectors known to have egregious breaches of employment rights legislation, and act on illegal working and tax status.

We are committed to publishing a consultation on our plans to tackle employment status problems. It is important to look at whether the current test for employment status places the line between being a worker and being self-employed in the right place, and to consider how to improve compliance with the law so that everyone gets the rights to which they are entitled. Employment status is inherently complex, as we have heard in contributions to this debate.

I thank hon. Members for their time and consideration. We are doing lots of other work in this area, including for the self-employed, which I would like to talk about in further detail. However, in the interests of time I will not—I see you gesturing at the time with your pen, Mr Efford. I thank all hon. Members for contributing and thank my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough for securing the debate.

Groceries Code Adjudicator: Statutory Review

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Tuesday 14th April 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

In line with the Government’s regulatory action plan, which seeks to ensure the UK’s regulatory system is targeted, proportionate and supports growth, I am today publishing and laying before Parliament the report on the fourth statutory review of the Groceries Code Adjudicator.

The GCA was established by the Groceries Code Adjudicator Act 2013. Its role is to monitor and enforce the groceries supply code of practice, which the UK’s designated large grocery retailers must comply with when dealing with their direct suppliers.

The Government must review the performance of the GCA every three years, and this is the fourth statutory review since the GCA was established. The statutory review is not a review of the code or the remit of the GCA. The code is a competition measure owned by the Competition and Markets Authority as the UK’s independent competition authority. It was put in place to ensure that large supermarkets do not impose unfair risks on their suppliers which would adversely affect competition and, ultimately, consumers.

The fourth review considered the effectiveness of the GCA in enforcing the code over the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2025. A public consultation was held from 13 May to 5 August 2025 to meet the requirements of the Act for the Secretary of State to consult those with an interest in the code. Responses to the consultation, evidence from the GCA annual supplier survey and annual reports and other publicly available evidence enabled the Secretary of State to make an assessment of the performance of the GCA against the measures set out in the Act. These measures were explained in the terms of reference which are included in the report on the review, and in the consultation document, which was placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament on 13 May 2025.

The review has found the GCA to be a broadly effective regulator that made good use of its powers, adopting a proportionate and collaborative approach which usually resolved issues before the need for an arbitration or investigation. However, some respondents called for greater transparency around enforcement and more frequent use of investigatory powers. Despite high awareness of the GCA’s confidentiality obligations, concerns about reprisals persist, especially among smaller or harder-to-reach suppliers, leaving some still reluctant to report issues.

The Government conclude that the GCA has exercised its powers appropriately and continues to provide an important and effective regulatory function that continues to support competition and consumers, but may wish to consider the following:

Stakeholder confidence in the GCA’s collaborative approach: consider the concerns expressed from some stakeholders about the GCA’s limited use of its investigatory powers; and take any necessary action to ensure the basis and effectiveness of the GCA’s regulatory approach in enforcing the code is well understood.

Fear of reprisals deterring suppliers from reporting matters to the GCA: continue considering the concerns of some suppliers about the consequences of raising issues for their businesses; and take any necessary action to ensure suppliers’ concerns are not preventing the GCA receiving sufficient information to effectively enforce the code, with particular attention paid to harder-to-reach suppliers.

Transparency of GCA activity in practice: consider the concerns of stakeholders requesting practical examples; and ensure that suitable information is available to support the GCA’s purpose of enforcing and encouraging compliance with the code. The review also found no evidence to support the need to change the permitted maximum financial penalty the adjudicator can impose following an investigation into non-compliance. It also concluded that the information which the GCA may consider when deciding whether to launch a formal investigation into non-compliance should not be restricted.

The review also examined wider developments in the food supply chain, including the establishment of the Agricultural Supply Chain Adjudicator and the sector-by-sector roll-out of fair dealings regulations. While the GCA model remains effective and its independence is valued, respondents raised concerns about confusion between the GCA and ASCA’s remits, and the need for improved co-ordination, as well as emerging supply chain practices not covered by either regime.

The Government have therefore decided that sponsorship responsibility for the Groceries Code Adjudicator will move from the Department for Business and Trade to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. This will streamline oversight, strengthen coherence between the two adjudicators, and support clearer communication with stakeholders.

The report on the fourth statutory review of the GCA has today been placed in the Libraries of both Houses of Parliament.

[HCWS1504]

Statutory Menstrual Leave

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Paul Davies) for opening today’s debate and for bravely sharing his wife Leah’s experience of living with endometriosis. I also thank Michelle, who joins us in the Gallery, for creating the petition, sharing her story and experiences and bringing her daughter and so many other people here today to watch this debate. Finally, I thank my colleagues here who have reflected deeply on this matter, sharing their personal experiences and the experiences of their constituents and the many campaigners they have met across the country. The drive of all Members here today, and outside this Hall, makes it clear why the issue is so important for women and girls across the country and in our workplaces; clearly, we all know somebody impacted and living with various conditions that have led to a different experience at work. We want to see change and make sure that they can thrive in the workplace. That is why this debate is welcome and important.

I want to start by recognising the enormous, admirable strength of so many woman and girls living with endometriosis, adenomyosis and other menstrual conditions today, as well as the thousands of women who have come before us outside of this room. They have lived with the conditions for so long; they have not been diagnosed for many years, and it is harrowing to hear their reflections and stories from many colleagues today. I completely understand and share the determination to turn things around. I will touch on various actions that the Government have taken in the Department for Business and Trade—looking at specific workplace policies and our work with employers—and, of course, the strategic work that my colleagues in the Department for Health and Social Care are prioritising.

Recently, with the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, I was honoured to meet with Endometriosis UK to hear the lived experiences of women and their campaigns, including with Jasmina, the director of “Dear Doctor”. For those who have not watched it, it is an incredibly powerful film that describes living with the conditions and having to navigate working through the debilitating, but invisible, pain. It was incredibly moving to watch, and I thank them for it and for their time.

Of course, the conditions did not begin this year or this century. We are listening and taking action so that we can support women and girls across the country who live with those conditions. As Members, our constituents and the petition signatories know, they can be debilitating for patients. We have heard today about the pain, fatigue and psychological impacts, which are real, significant, and often have far-reaching consequences for women’s welfare and ability to fully participate in the workplace and education. It is unacceptable that health-related issues are the leading cause of women being excluded in the workplace. Over the past six years, the number of women who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness has risen by 425,000, reaching 1.48 million—close to a record high.

It is right that the Government are taking action on this issue from all sides, with our landmark Employment Rights Act making statutory sick pay more accessible and introducing equality action plans; access to work reforms in the Department for Work and Pensions through the “Keep Britain Working” programme; and our record investment in our NHS, which has seen gynaecology waiting lists fall by almost 20,000 and made transformative endometriosis medication available.

I will turn to the points that colleagues have made in this debate, and I thank them for raising them. We remain fully committed to learning from others and continue to look carefully at international best practice, which lots of colleagues have touched on today. That includes Portugal’s approach and other international examples that offer valuable insights into how to best support employees experiencing difficulties with menstrual health conditions.

I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bathgate and Linlithgow (Kirsteen Sullivan) for mentioning the endometriosis-friendly employer scheme. We expect employers to treat staff fairly and accommodate reasonable requests for employees suffering from menstrual health conditions. Many employers, as has been mentioned, choose to provide that voluntary support to staff, and the Government continue to encourage best practice. I thank colleagues for raising the scheme with me; two Departments—the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and the Department for Transport—have already signed up, and I will take this away for the Department for Business and Trade to consider. I thank colleagues for raising that scheme.

Turning to statutory sick pay, one of the key issues raised in the debate is ensuring that women and girls experiencing debilitating symptoms from menstrual conditions are supported and not financially punished for a condition beyond their control. Our Government’s landmark Employment Rights Act delivers that, extending statutory sick pay to employees on day one—their first day of sickness—regardless of how much they earn. No more waiting a few days and no more not being entitled to statutory sick pay if they earn a certain amount.

While it is regretful that the Opposition voted against the Employment Rights Act at every stage in Parliament, I think the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul), welcomed our statutory sick pay introductions this month. Those will change the lives of so many people across this country—as she and colleagues in this Chamber have pointed out—because they mean that, for the first time, those with fluctuating conditions such as endometriosis and adenomyosis are eligible for statutory sick pay from the first day that their sickness prevents them from working. Before the 2025 Act, they were excluded from statutory sick pay unless absence lasted for four days. That was a draconian system that harmed the least well off, ignored the lived experience of thousands of women, and desperately needed reform. It is absolutely right that we have dragged that system into the 21st century.

The Act also ensured that the UK leads the way in supporting employees to work flexibly. Flexible and hybrid working arrangements are vital in ensuring that employees who require reasonable adjustments, such as those with health conditions, are supported at work and are able to contribute to our workforce. That is particularly valuable for those with fluctuating or unpredictable conditions, including endometriosis and other menstrual health conditions, making it easier to manage symptoms and attend medical appointments, and reducing sickness absences.

The Act improves employees’ ability to work flexibly by requiring employers to accept flexible working requests, provided they are reasonable. Where they cannot accept those requests, employers will be required to discuss the challenges in accommodating them with employees and to consider alternative options, and, if they cannot agree an arrangement, to explain their reasoning. A public consultation on these reforms is currently under way until 30 April, and I encourage members of the public and advocacy organisations to please make submissions and ensure that their views are taken into account.

Alongside the right to request flexible working, protections continue to be available under the Equality Act, where symptoms have a substantial and long-term adverse effect on day-to-day activities. Conditions such as endometriosis, adenomyosis and premenstrual disorders can meet the definition of disability under the Equality Act. Employers absolutely have a duty to make reasonable adjustments, such as flexible hours, modified duties, part-time arrangements or phased returns. Those reasonable adjustments are well established, enforceable and designed to prevent discrimination and disadvantage.

[Kirsteen Sullivan]

Menstrual health conditions, including endometriosis, result in an estimated cost of £11 billion a year to the UK economy. Does my hon. Friend agree that having more supportive workplaces—workplaces without stigma, where there is an understanding of the chronic nature of some of those conditions—will have a positive effect not only for the women living with those conditions but overall, for our economy?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution and for her powerful speech during this debate. She is a tireless campaigner on this; I really look forward to working with her and the APPG on lots of these issues, and particularly on that stigma. She raises an excellent point about the role of employers in ensuring that there are supportive workplaces that can talk about health conditions that women experience, to make sure that they thrive at work. She mentioned the cost to our wider economy, and I thank her for doing that; it really recognises the significance of this issue and why we need to absolutely support those women across workplaces, and to work with employers to do that.

Turning to equality action plans, we are also working with employers to help women to thrive at work, and on how they can support women’s health much more proactively. Ahead of International Women’s Day, we were pleased to launch voluntary action plans to help those large employers address their gender pay gaps and improve support for employees experiencing menopause. As part of that announcement, we published a list of evidence-informed actions that employers can take—ones that are proven to work—and I thank my hon. Friend for raising that throughout her contribution.

Within the action plan, we are asking employers to commit to a minimum of two actions: one to address their gender pay gaps and one focused on supporting employees experiencing menopause, including those in both the perimenopausal and postmenopausal stages. Many of the recommended actions are also likely to benefit employees managing other menstrual health-related conditions, such as endometriosis, fibroids and polycystic ovary syndrome, which can significantly affect wellbeing and contribute to workplace disadvantage. It is a real opportunity for Government and business to work together to drive forward that meaningful change to improve workplace equality, and a huge step forward in supporting women’s health in the workplace.

We are also taking further action to address the barriers that menstrual health can raise in the workplace through Mariella Frostrup’s recent appointment as the Government’s women’s employment ambassador, building on her significant achievements in the past 18 months as the menopause employment ambassador. In this expanded role, she will champion women’s health across the life course, working with employers nationwide to strengthen workplace support, raise awareness of key health conditions and highlight the vital economic contribution that women make.

Prior to my appointment as a Minister, I worked with the founder of Endometriosis UK’s Calderdale and Kirklees branch, a formidable woman named Natalie Greenwood, to connect her organisation with trade union members locally and employers and officials across the UK, to ensure that workplace policies are inclusive of women with menstrual conditions. I encourage all hon. Friends and petition signatories to take action in their constituencies so that we can all, together, work with our employers to support women in the workplace. With the right workplace support, we can unleash the full talent, creativity and potential for women across the country. That is good for women, business, our economy and our country. 

Following Sir Charlie Mayfield’s independent review, we are taking broader action through the keep women working programme, which hon. Members have mentioned today, to help more women to stay in work. In response to that review, the Government have launched the vanguard phase, working with employers of different sectors, sizes and regions all across the country to test the practical ways of improving workplace health support. That vanguard phase will consider a range of insights through different lenses, including women’s health. We are also establishing a new workplace health intelligence unit to build that evidence base and support benchmarking. That sits alongside our £1 billion a year pathway to work programme. 

Throughout this debate, colleagues have rightly touched on the problems with diagnosis and asked for an update on the women’s health strategy, which I will turn to, but I can reassure everyone across the House that their powerful contributions and the points they raised for colleagues across Government will be raised with my health colleagues. This is not an area that just sits in my Department and with employers; we are committed to it across Government.

I have heard personal stories, including from colleagues here today about women outside this room who have spent too many years seeking answers, being misdiagnosed, having symptoms minimised or being passed from service to service. The experiences highlighted in Endometriosis UK’s recent report underlines why that early-year diagnosis and consistent, compassionate care must be central to our approach. From our introduction of Jess’s rule, requiring GPs to reconsider diagnosis where symptoms persist, to the roll-out of Martha’s rule, which colleagues will be aware of, we want to ensure that women’s concerns are not dismissed.

The shadow Minister mentioned the impact that community diagnostic services can have, which is why we are expanding access to diagnostic services and rolling them out country wide for women. Last month, there were 106 centres offering out-of-hours appointments for women to get those vital tests around work and caring responsibilities, and I really welcome the work of my colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care.

We are also modernising how specialist care is delivered. In September, we announced our new online hospital, NHS Online, which will be unconstrained by geographical boundaries, better aligning clinical capacity with patient demand. Earlier this year, we confirmed that menstrual problems, often a sign of conditions such as endometriosis, will be the among the first nine conditions available for referral from 2027. Those details are being worked out ahead of next year’s launch.

However, we completely understand that better care also depends on better understanding and improving public and healthcare profession awareness of menstrual health conditions, to reduce stigma and ensure that symptoms are recognised rather than normalised or dismissed. My hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood Forest (Michelle Welsh) made such a powerful point around how period pains are considered to simply be painful and women and girls across the country should expect that; improving awareness is key to dealing with that. The General Medical Council has strengthened women’s health representation in training, and since last year has required UK medical graduates to pass that medical licensing assessment, to encourage better understanding of women’s health problems. That assessment includes topics on women’s health and endometriosis.

Before I conclude, I must touch on the women’s health strategy, which is really welcome. We have made strong progress turning the commitments in the last Government’s women’s health strategy into tangible action. Our renewed strategy will set out how this Government will take further steps to improve women’s health as we deliver the 10-year health plan. It will also address the gaps in the 2022 strategy, and go further to create a system that listens to women, tackles health inequalities and makes progress on conditions such as endometriosis. Renewing that strategy will help identify and remove enduring barriers to high-quality care, such as those extremely long wait lists for diagnosis, and ensure that professionals listen and respond to women’s needs. I am sure colleagues will be—and already are—engaging with my colleagues in the Health Department on that.

To conclude, I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley for leading the debate, the hon. Members in the Chamber for their powerful contributions and Michelle for her brave action that made this deeply important debate happen. I assure Members and petition signatories that I recognise the significant impact of menstrual health conditions, and I will consider all the points raised today as I continue to engage with stakeholders, with the APPG and with excellent Members across the House who are formidable in running their campaigns and raising this issue at every single opportunity—I thank them for that. We must ensure that lived experience continues to shape policy.

Trade Union Access to the Workplace and TUPE Reform

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

The Government have set the country on the path of national renewal, building a Britain for all on the firm foundations of security, respect and opportunity. That means creating an economy that delivers for working people: productive, profitable and growing, and creating the best environment for business by maximising job security to raise productivity, improve skills and cut the costs of staff turnover.

The Government’s plan to make work pay will bring employment rights legislation into the 21st century. We are building an economy based on fair competition between businesses, greater productivity in the workplace, job security for workers, and fair reward for hard work, delivered in partnership with businesses, trade unions, public sector employers and civil society.

Government response to the consultation “Make Work Pay: trade union right of access”

As part of this, last autumn we consulted on strengthening trade union access to the workplace. Respondents engaged extensively, and their feedback has been carefully analysed and used to inform the final statutory access framework.

The Government response published today sets out the decisions and how the right of access framework will operate in practice, ensuring it is proportionate and enables regulated and responsible union access to the workplace. This includes:

Clear requirements for written union access requests and employer responses, supported by Government-issued templates;

Defined time periods for responses, negotiation and any referrals to the Central Arbitration Committee, with flexibility for agreed extensions;

Circumstances where the CAC must refuse access and when it may be reasonable to do so, ensuring safeguards for all parties; and

A three-tier enforcement system and clear factors the CAC must consider when setting fines, such as the scale and resources of the liable party.

Consultation on draft code of practice on Trade Union Right of Access

Alongside the Government response, we are launching a consultation on a new draft code of practice on statutory trade union access. The code will provide clear, practical guidance for employers and unions on how to navigate the new framework and apply it across different types of workplaces. This is an opportunity for all interested parties to help shape this guidance before it is finalised, helping ensure that the new statutory right of access is well understood and supports smooth, effective implementation.

The consultation will run for six weeks, closing in April.

The final policy details for trade union access to workplaces will be set out in legislation through statutory instruments, which will be laid in Parliament this summer alongside the code of practice.

TUPE Call for Evidence

Today we are also launching a call for evidence on the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations—TUPE. The Make Work Pay plan committed to reforming the TUPE regulations. The regulations exist to support business transfers and protect staff whose job is moved to a new employer. We believe firms should be able to smoothly transfer part or all of their business or transfer service provision, and supporting a stable workforce during transitions can in turn support a competitive business environment. The TUPE regulations should be easy to understand and follow for employers and protect staff.

We intend to consider reforms based on these principles —maintaining the right level of employment rights and protections but simplifying the process for employers.

Through this call for evidence, we will gather evidence on the prevalence and experience of TUPE, including on how many employees it affects and what types of employees and employers are affected. It will also gather evidence on whether employers understand the current rules, and whether the current required steps are followed in practice. We will engage stakeholders throughout. The information gathered will support decision making on any TUPE reforms.

Next steps

This package of consultations sets out the next steps in delivering our plans. They are critical to shaping the practical implementation of this legislation, helping the Government to deliver reforms that are both effective and inclusive. It is in everyone’s interest to get the relationship between employer and worker right. These consultations and the further consultations planned will help us make work pay for both.

[HCWS1499]

Subscription Contracts Regime: Response to Implementation Consultation

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

Subscription contracts play an increasingly significant role in the lives of UK consumers. Across the economy, people rely on subscription services for everything from streaming and software to meal kits, fitness, and household essentials. There are an estimated 155 million active subscriptions in the UK, representing around £26 billion of consumer spending each year. While this model brings genuine convenience for many, far too often people find themselves stuck in subscriptions they no longer want or need, or paying for contracts that automatically renewed without their full awareness. Some £1.6 billion is spent annually on unwanted subscriptions in the UK.

This Government are committed to protecting consumers and ensuring that they have clarity and control over their spending, especially during a time when household budgets are under pressure. Today we are taking an important step to deliver on that commitment by publishing the Government response to the consultation on the implementation of the new subscription contracts regime.

This marks another milestone in enhancing consumer protection and implementing measures introduced in the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024. These will strengthen consumer rights and help people across the UK keep more of their hard-earned money, which will save consumers an average of £14 per month for every unwanted subscription they can cancel.

Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act received Royal Assent on 24 May 2024 and established a new regulatory framework for subscription contracts. This requires businesses to give clear pre-contract information and send regular reminders about ongoing subscriptions. Businesses must also ensure that it is straightforward for consumers to cancel, and provide online cancellation if consumers can sign up online. The Act also introduces new statutory cancellation rights, including 14-day cooling-off periods when free or discounted trials roll on to higher full price terms or when contracts of 12 months or more auto-renew.

These measures maintain and build on existing protections under the Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Government response to the consultation on the implementation of the new subscription contracts regime

The Government have reviewed the evidence submitted through the consultation process and will bring forward secondary legislation for the following proposals:

Cooling-off rights and refunds

If a consumer exercises their 14-day initial cooling-off right (after they sign up) or 14 day renewal cooling-off right (after trial ends or a contract renews for longer than 12 months), new return and refund rules will provide:

For returnable goods, consumers will receive a refund when goods are returned, including standard delivery costs.

For perishable and bespoke goods, they will receive a full refund if they cancel before the goods are supplied. If they cancel after the goods are supplied, the trader will be entitled to reduce the refund by the value of those goods—including all delivery costs.

Where goods are sealed for specified reasons—for example, for health protection or hygiene—and become unsealed after delivery or goods become inseparably mixed with other goods after delivery, the trader will be entitled to reduce the consumer’s refund to cover the value of these now unreturnable goods.

For service contracts, if consumers cancel during an initial or renewal cooling-off period, they will be entitled to a partial refund proportionate to the services supplied before cancellation.

For digital content contracts, consumers may waive their initial cooling-off right in return for the supply of digital content during the initial cooling-off period. If consumers cancel during the renewal cooling-off period, they will be entitled to a partial refund proportionate to the digital content supplied during the renewal period before cancellation.

Extension of the cooling-off period

If a trader is in breach of the requirement to inform a consumer about their cooling-off rights, the cooling-off period extends to 14 days after the trader corrects their breach, up to a maximum of 12 months after the original end date.

Ancillary contracts and mixed contracts

We will legislate so that if the main subscription contract is cancelled, ancillary contracts are treated in the same was as they are under the existing Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013.

Contractual terms and auto-renewal

We will legislate to prevent contractual terms that make it disproportionately difficult for consumers to stop a subscription from auto-renewing.

Cancellation remedies for breach of duties

If traders breach statutory obligations, such as failing to send reminder notices, consumers will have clear rights to appropriate refunds. We will also introduce a list of specific breaches for which refunds will apply automatically.

Information notices

Consumers must be provided with clear information about their contract and the purpose of communications must be clear. Notices must be provided on a “durable medium” (a format that the consumer can easily access in the future) and important information must be both clear and prominent.

Charitable memberships

We recognise the vital contribution of the UK’s cultural and heritage charities, and the public benefit they provide. In response to concerns raised by the sector, the Government will exclude certain charitable cultural and heritage memberships from the new subscription regime, ensuring they are not subject to additional requirements beyond those that already apply under existing consumer law. Broadly this will exclude contracts which are between a charity and a consumer and that allow consumers to attend performances, see collections, or visit places—for example, museums, galleries, historical properties, landscapes, wildlife, performing arts—which are related to their charitable purpose.

Next steps

This new framework will empower consumers with clearer rights, fairer terms, and easier ways to manage their subscriptions. It will also support competition and growth by ensuring businesses operate on a level playing field with strong, trusted consumer protections at its core. Under the new regime, consumers will benefit from:

Clear, tailored information before they sign up to a subscription.

Reminders before a trial period ends or a 12 months-plus contract auto-renews.

Easy, straightforward cancellation routes, including online cancellation if consumers can sign up online.

A new renewal cooling-off period, allowing consumers to exit a contract within 14 days of a trial or a contract renewing for longer than 12 months-plus if they change their mind.

In a world where an increasing numbers of goods and services are sold using subscriptions, these measures will protect consumers from being trapped in unwanted subscription contracts and be better able to control how and where they spend their money. Together the measures are anticipated to provide £400 million of consumer benefits per year.

The Government will bring forward secondary legislation covering the above, when parliamentary time allows, and we expect the regime to commence in spring 2027. We will also publish guidance to support implementation.

I am placing a copy of the Government response to the consultation in the Libraries of both Houses.

[HCWS1498]

Product Safety Framework Reform: Consultations

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Monday 13th April 2026 Written Statements

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

We have launched three consultations setting out major reforms to modernise the product safety framework and review the UK’s furniture fire safety regulations. Using the powers provided by the Product Regulation and Metrology Act 2025, our proposals will strengthen protection for consumers from unsafe products and create a level playing field that supports responsible businesses. Proposals will clarify responsibilities and streamline regulations, which will create certainty and support growth and investment. At the heart of these proposals is a commitment to consolidate and modernise market surveillance and enforcement powers across product safety legislation.

The existing product safety framework has been stretched to its limit by increasingly globalised supply chains and the ever-changing way in which consumers buy products. The new framework must address the issues of today and be prepared to deal with the potential challenges of tomorrow. Modern-day products and supply chains have exposed UK consumers to new harms. We have seen serious incidents that have tragically caused death and personal injury, from fatal house fires caused by unsafe e-bike batteries exploding, to children being injured by swallowing powerful magnets marketed as toys. These incidents highlight the real risks posed by unsafe products and are why these consultations are so important.

A particular challenge has been the rise of e-commerce, which has rapidly changed the way consumers buy products and exposed regulatory gaps in today’s global supply chains. For too long, online marketplaces have made third-party sales of dangerous products too easy. As announced in the Budget 2025, we are consulting on proposals to introduce new requirements on online marketplaces and create a level playing field for UK “bricks and mortar” businesses and our high streets.

We must ensure that people can rely on the safety of products they buy and use every day, whether in the home or the workplace. The consultations set out how we will bring product safety protections up to date and ensure they work for the future.

The consultations cover proposals in the following areas:

Getting the basics right: proposals for the new framework to cover a wider scope of products, updating how a safe product will be defined and how the safety of a product can be assessed to reflect modern technology and new hazards. This will be monitored through updated and consolidated enforcement powers.

Accountability throughout the supply chain: proposals setting out the responsibilities of businesses in scope of the new framework, including online marketplaces and online sellers, and their core obligations to protect consumers from dangerous products.

A new approach to product information: proposals to allow product information to be provided more flexibly—both physically and digitally—and to move towards a “digital by default” approach to product information.

Building on the new foundations: proposals for additional tools to manage products posing greater risk of harm and paving the way for further reform of sector and product-specific regulations; and a call for evidence on how artificial intelligence-enabled products can best be regulated to balance safety and innovation.

A reformed enforcement framework: addressing duplication, overlap and inconsistent terminology, and establishing a single, coherent framework that is clearer for regulators, more predictable for businesses, and better able to respond to modern risks. It will also modernise and consolidate the UK’s market surveillance system, giving authorities clearer, more consistent powers to act quickly on unsafe or non-compliant products across all routes to market, including online.

The consultations will support us in determining how best to put our plans into practice. I encourage everyone with an interest in product safety to respond to the consultations and share their views to help deliver a safer future for all.

Alongside the two broad product safety framework consultations, we have published a third consultation to review the UK’s furniture fire safety regulations. This consultation sets out our intent to implement new furniture fire safety regulations that can be met by passing a smoulder test, which is consistent with the approach taken in much of the EU and the United States. This follows an evidence-led approach to craft a set of proposals that will maintain a high level of fire safety, while meaningfully reducing the reliance on chemical flame retardants.

These consultations will close after 12 weeks on 23 June 2026.

Alongside this package of consultations, the Government intend to introduce legislation to reform product labelling for certain products where the UKCA—UK conformity assessed—or CE marking applies. These measures follow the product safety review and the Government’s subsequent commitment to consider the most effective way to introduce digital labelling. The measures will give more flexibility to businesses over how these products are labelled, both physically and digitally. This is only the first step. The consultations build on this announcement and include proposals to provide greater flexibility in product labelling in the future.

I have placed copies of the consultations in the Library in both Houses.

[HCWS1496]

Oral Answers to Questions

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Thursday 12th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

22. What recent progress he has made on improving parental rights at work.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

This Government are committed to strengthening rights for parents. In April, we are introducing bereaved partner’s paternity leave and making unpaid parental leave and paternity leave day one rights, bringing more than 1 million parents into scope. Next year, we will further improve protections for pregnant women and those returning from maternity leave, and the parental leave and pay review will conclude, giving us recommendations and informing our next steps.

[Laura Kyrke-Smith]

The Government are making great strides in improving parental rights at work, but for kinship carers it is still tough. In Aylesbury, I met a wonderful lady who has become the kinship carer for her baby grandson, but she was given only 10 days of paid leave from work. She now has to take unpaid leave to care for him, which is causing serious financial strain. Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to all our kinship carers for their remarkable work and outline what discussions she is having across Government to ensure that kinship carers get the support that they deserve?

[Kate Dearden]

I recognise the enormous contribution that kinship carers such as my hon. Friend’s constituent make to the lives of children. The Government are committed to helping more children grow up in safe, stable and loving homes in their family network, whenever it is in the children’s best interests. I acknowledge the incredible commitment and generosity of kinship carers in opening up their hearts and homes to our most vulnerable children. Kinship carers are absolutely transforming young lives, and we should not underestimate the life-changing difference that they make every single day. Our parental leave and pay review is considering the needs of all working families who do not qualify for existing leave and pay entitlements, including kinship carers.

[Sarah Russell]

Since 2004, the limit on relief for small employers at which they can reclaim statutory maternity pay has been set at £45,000. Small and medium-sized enterprises want to support working parents, but they need our help to do so. Will the Minister confirm whether that will be looked at as part of the parental leave review?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank my hon. Friend for her advocacy on this issue. The Government acknowledge that the class 1 national insurance contributions threshold used to determine eligibility for small employers’ relief on statutory parental pay has remained unchanged for several years. Part of the relief is an additional compensation payment, known as small employers’ compensation. Last April, the Government increased the SEC rate from 3% to 8.5%, and we will increase it to 9% from 6 April 2026. The Government keep all eligibility criteria under review while balancing the needs of business and the Exchequer.

[Josh Newbury]

Many of us on the Labour Benches have long argued for a boost to paternity leave, which is one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government, but one group being let down badly is self-employed dads. Just one in six of them take leave after their children are born, and it is unpaid leave, meaning that they face a drop in income of more than £1,000 just for taking a couple of weeks off. Introducing paid paternity leave for self-employed dads would cost £38 million at most, and possibly as little as £13 million, but it would be a huge win for dads, mums and their babies. Will the Minister consider that as part of the ongoing parental leave review?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank my hon. Friend for his campaigning on this issue. As I have mentioned, the Government’s parental leave and pay review is under way and will conclude in early 2027. We know that the parental leave system needs to be improved and recognise that the current system does not do enough to support the many dads and partners who want to be hands-on and actively involved in caring for their children. That is why the review is so important. It will consider all current and upcoming parental leave and pay entitlements, looking at options to improve the support available to British working families and whether the support available meets the needs of working families who do not qualify for the entitlements, such as self-employed parents, as was outlined by my hon. Friend.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests; I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for infant feeding and inequalities. One of the key barriers to women returning to the workplace occurs if they continue to breastfeed their children. A lot of workplaces do not provide facilities for expressing and storing breast milk. Will the Minister update the House on what the Department is doing to support women back into the workplace when they are still breastfeeding their children?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank the hon. Member for raising this important question in the House today. We are committed to ensuring that every parent feels secure at work, particularly breastfeeding mums when they are returning to the workplace. She will know of the different bits of legislation we are introducing through the Employment Rights Act 2025 to help women back into work, whether that is making it more unlawful to dismiss pregnant women and mothers on maternity leave or making it easier for people to work flexibly and for employers to make those provisions in the workplace. I would be keen to hear more about the work that the hon. Member and other Members from across the House are doing on the APPG.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for that very positive answer. There is nobody in this House or further afield who does not welcome the improvement of parental rights at work. I had a chance to speak to the Minister beforehand, so she will know where my question is coming from—I ask it on behalf of the small and medium-sized businesses that may find it difficult to cover those who are on parental leave. Has anything been done to help businesses, especially the small ones, that might find it difficult to put someone in place to cover those people’s jobs when they are off?

[Kate Dearden]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that family-friendly workplaces strengthen our workforce and our economy, and are important in reducing the turnover of staff and retaining high-quality staff. That is why it is really important that we are working with businesses, small and large, on our wider parental pay and leave review. In every area of my work, I am very conscious of the need to work closely with businesses in different areas, recognising that we share the same goal of keeping people in work, and especially of supporting parents and making sure that workplaces are much more family-friendly.

[Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)]

2. What steps he is taking to help increase levels of private sector investment in Buckingham and Bletchley constituency.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jerome Mayhew (Broadland and Fakenham) (Con)]

21. What steps his Department is taking to support the hospitality sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

The Government recognise the central role the hospitality sector plays in supporting jobs, sustaining high streets and strengthening community life. That is why we have significantly increased the hospitality support fund, providing £10 million over three years to help hospitality businesses become more resilient, allowing them to thrive. We have permanently reduced business rates for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties, benefiting 750,000 properties. We are also beginning cross-Government work on a high streets strategy, developed with businesses and representatives, to be published later this year.

[David Mundell]

Energy costs are obviously a huge issue for hospitality businesses in a large rural constituency such as Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, but they are also an issue for hospitality business customers, because generally people travel to those businesses using their cars. Will the Minister and her colleagues in the Department lobby the Prime Minister and the Chancellor to ensure that the proposed rise in fuel duty does not go ahead in September?

[Kate Dearden]

I recognise that energy costs remain one of the biggest pressures facing hospitality businesses. I meet them regularly—including just this week—to make sure I am aware of their concerns and experiences on the ground. The real risk to businesses is dependence on volatile international gas markets, which we have, of course, seen; we have been left exposed to global energy shocks. The Government are prioritising on having more of our own power here in Britain. We are focusing on that to tackle the root cause of unstable energy markets. We are working closely with businesses, and across the sector, to understand the pressures, and we will continue to do so in a responsible way.

[Sir Gavin Williamson]

I am deeply concerned, as I am sure the Minister is, about the rising rate of youth unemployment, which is currently standing at 15%. One of the key employers of young people is the hospitality sector, as well as the retail sector. When I speak to businesses in my constituency of Stone, Great Wyrley and Penkridge, so many of them reference the fact that they have been hit by business rates and the impact of national insurance. That is discouraging investment and reducing job opportunities for young people. What action is the Minister taking to reverse that trend?

[Kate Dearden]

I agree that hospitality provides first jobs and career pathways for young people—a really important opportunity. As I have said many times in the House, it was my experience into employment, as I am sure it was for many other colleagues. Young people absolutely deserve that opportunity, which is why our focus is on skills and training, and getting young people into work. We will continue to back employers who take on apprentices and provide those opportunities, whether providing full training costs for young apprentices aged 16 to 21, or through employers not being required to pay national insurance contributions for all apprentices under the age of 25.

Under the previous Government, the number of youth apprenticeships was cut by 40%, and they presided over a massive increase in young people not in education, employment and training. I recognise what we are working with, but we want to provide opportunities for young people. We will not leave an entire generation of young people behind. We are looking to our £820 million youth guarantee and so much more to provide that employment support and to give them a guaranteed job, recognising the sector is vital.

[Jerome Mayhew]

Six hospitality venues are closing every single day under this Government. If the Government actually asked the sector why, businesses would tell them: it is because of the jobs-killing national insurance tax rises—literally a tax on jobs—as well as the red tape and additional costs of the Employment Rights Act 2025. When are the Government finally going to realise that those job losses and business closures are not happening despite the work of the Government, they are happening because of it?

[Kate Dearden]

The Conservative party left deep economic scars on our economy: weak growth, insecure work and a fragile labour market. This Government are restoring stability and rebuilding opportunity for people. Hospitality in particular is a vital sector for our high streets and for people. It thrives when the economy grows, wages rise, and people have more money to spend. We will always support our hospitality businesses, but do so responsibly and sustainably. They are at the heart of our high streets and community, and that is why we are backing them. We are reforming the broken system of business rates that the Conservatives left and did nothing about, and building a better support system for businesses, so they can thrive and support all employment, particularly for our young people.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

Drivers looking for refreshment on the motorway have regular signs to point them to the available hospitality, but it is less easy for drivers of electric vehicles to see where they can get a coffee and a charge because of arcane rules that prevent EV signage on motorways. This is also a problem on A roads—one charge company told me it was quoted £150,000 to put up two signs on an A road. Given that many hospitality businesses have partnerships with EV charge providers, will the Minister work with the Department for Transport to change these mad signage rules and support hospitality and EV charging?

[Kate Dearden]

I thank my hon. Friend for bringing this issue to the House today. We are working closely with industry to promote consumer confidence in electric vehicles and their charging infrastructure. As at the end of February 2026, the Government and industry have supported the installation of more than 118,000 public chargers. In a move to help EV drivers to plug in to the rapidly expanding charging network, the Government are also modernising EV charging signage on major A roads, with changes allowing larger EV charging hubs to be signposted from major A roads, too. We are working with local authorities to make it easier to provide that signage to charging facilities on local roads.

[Ms Julie Minns (Carlisle) (Lab)]

For almost a year, the constituents of my friend and neighbour, the right hon. Member for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale (David Mundell), have enjoyed the benefits of the guest beer agreement. Given that the Society of Independent Brewers believes that a right to buy a guest beer drives customers into pubs, can the Minister update the House on when she expects to announce the results of the beer market review and the merits of introducing a guest beer agreement in England?

[Kate Dearden]

My hon. Friend and I have discussed this matter at length. She champions the pubs in her constituency, and I thank her for it. We recognise the importance of independent breweries and pubs, and remain committed to ensuring that the beer and pub sector remains diverse, competitive and rooted in local communities. We have reviewed the beer market to assess any barriers facing small breweries and will announce the outcome in due course.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

In the Q4 2025 quarterly economic survey, 52% of businesses reported utility costs as a pressure that is driving them to raise prices, and there is a particular impact on the hospitality sector. Recent research by the British Chambers of Commerce shows that more than a quarter of businesses will struggle to pay their energy bills over the next 12 months, and this survey was conducted before the recent escalation in the middle east. Last week’s forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility also did not take into account any potential impact from the jump in oil prices triggered by the strikes in Iran. The fuel duty hike in September is already expected to hit families and small businesses hard, so will the Secretary of State speak to the Chancellor now about scrapping this damaging policy?

[Kate Dearden]

The hon. Lady will have heard in my earlier remarks that I absolutely recognise those pressures and meet hospitality businesses regularly to hear their concerns; energy costs have, of course, come up as one of the biggest pressures facing them. I recognise the concerns those businesses will have when looking at the Gulf conflict and its possible impacts. As the hon. Lady will have heard in my earlier answer, the real risk to businesses is dependence on the volatile international gas markets, which has left us exposed. She will know the work that we are doing in different Departments to recognise that and to tackle that root cause in order to provide better support for businesses. We are looking at the unstable energy markets that have left us exposed and trying to ensure that we have more power here in Britain; we will work with the sector closely and across Government on that.

[Tom Rutland (East Worthing and Shoreham) (Lab)]

8. What steps he is taking to increase trade ties with Europe.

--- Later in debate ---

[Daniel Francis (Bexleyheath and Crayford) (Lab)]

10. What steps he is taking to support micropubs in Bexleyheath and Crayford constituency.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

Pubs and micropubs like the ones in my hon. Friend’s constituency are at the heart of all our communities. From April, every pub will receive a 15% reduction on its business rates bill, with bills then frozen in real terms for a further two years. Three quarters of pubs will see their bills stay the same or fall, saving the average pub around £1,650 next year. We are also launching a review of how pubs are valued for business rates and investing £10 million through the hospitality support fund to help pubs diversify and to improve productivity across the sector.

[Daniel Francis]

I recently visited the Bird & Barrel micropub in Barnehurst, which also operates the Bexley Brewery in Slade Green in my constituency. They informed me that, due to the number of tied tenants in the constituency, they have access to less than 8% of the local pub market across Bexleyheath and Crayford. They are pressing me, and I will be pressing, like my hon. Friend the Member for Carlisle (Ms Minns), to see the pubs code updated to support micropubs and breweries. Will my hon. Friend give some more detail about when we may see some more progress on that matter?

[Kate Dearden]

What a champion my hon. Friend is for micropubs in his constituency. From Anchor Bay to Bakewell Tart Stout, Bexley Brewery showcases an excellent range of beers, and small brewers and micropubs such as the Bird & Barrel play a vital role in supporting local communities and economies. Alongside the beer market review, the Government are carrying out a statutory review of the pubs code and the Pubs Code Adjudicator, as well as a post-implementation review to assess the code’s impact since 2016. The Government’s report covering that work will be published as soon as practicable.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

12. What assessment his Department has made of recent trends in levels of business confidence in the hospitality sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

The Government closely monitor business confidence across the hospitality sector and recognise that businesses face real and sustained pressures. That is why we have announced targeted support measures to help the sector remain resilient. They include: permanently lower business rates for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure properties; a significant increase to the hospitality support fund; and action to reduce regulatory burdens by pressing ahead with licensing reform for a new national licensing policy framework to provide greater flexibility for pubs and hospitality venues, allowing them to thrive.

[John Lamont]

Hospitality businesses in the Scottish borders are being squeezed by rising energy costs and wage and supply bills. Does the Minister think that this Labour Government’s jobs tax has helped or hindered the hospitality sector?

[Kate Dearden]

Business confidence depends on economic stability, and that is exactly what this Government are delivering: a stable economy where businesses can invest in growth. The hon. Member will have heard my commitment to the hospitality sector—both my personal investment and my absolute determination to work closely with the sector so that we can build stronger local economies with stronger high streets and thriving businesses. Businesses will see that stronger demand, especially when working people have more money to spend, and we are focused on building that stability for our local communities and for businesses to benefit too.

[Lee Barron (Corby and East Northamptonshire) (Lab)]

15. What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of postal delivery services.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)]

T3. I refer Members to my declaration of interest as a former employee of USDAW. The new rights of trade union access in the Employment Rights Act 2025 could be game changing, but there is a proposal to cap fines for breaking new rules at £75,000, which is loose change for union-busting employees like Amazon. Will my hon. Friend consider setting fines at a percentage of global turnover, as is the case for GDPR breaches and ticket touting websites?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

I thank my hon. Friend for her work in this area. The Government believe that trade unions are absolutely essential for tackling insecurity, inequality, discrimination, enforcement and low pay. We are providing a legal framework for businesses and unions to negotiate access to the workplace. We recognise that for the framework to effectively facilitate that access, it has to be supported. That is why we are consulting on this. Officials are reviewing those responses, and we will publish a response in due course.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

T2. Small businesses in Bridgwater were hit last year with the Chancellor’s jobs tax. This year, they face the additional burdens of the Secretary of State’s unemployment Act and higher business rates. With petrol and diesel prices rising, the last thing they want is a fuel duty increase. Will he speak to the Chancellor and ask her to cancel her fuel duty rise in September?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lauren Edwards (Rochester and Strood) (Lab)]

I add my voice to that of my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Daniel Francis) in calling on the Government to publish the review of market access for small breweries as soon as possible. I was delighted that Moot Brew brewery from Halling in my constituency produced the guest ale for the Strangers’ Bar in the House of Commons before Christmas. Will the Secretary of State support a national guest beer agreement policy, so that more fantastic local brewers such as Moot are represented in my local pubs?

[Kate Dearden]

My hon. Friend is a real champion for her local breweries, especially Moot Brew in Halling, which produces excellent beer—I know she visits regularly. We recognise the importance of independent breweries and pubs, and we are of course committed to ensuring that the sector remains diverse, competitive and rooted in local communities. We have reviewed the beer market to assess any barriers, and I will keep my hon. Friend updated.

[Sir Iain Duncan Smith (Chingford and Woodford Green) (Con)]

Small-volume business manufacturers in the automotive sector are having a terrible time at the moment. They rely on exports, and exports to the US are critical. Although I welcome the agreement the Government struck, costs are still four times what they were before President Trump introduced his tariffs, and those businesses are also being squeezed by business rates and national insurance at home. Will the Secretary of State make urgent representations to the Chancellor? The market is very delicate, and something must be done to reduce costs.

Draft Employment Rights Act 2025 (Investigatory Powers) (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2026

Kate Dearden Excerpts

Tuesday 10th March 2026 General Committees

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden)]

I beg to move,

That the Committee has considered the draft Employment Rights Act 2025 (Investigatory Powers) (Consequential Amendments) Regulations 2026.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stuart. The draft regulations are narrow, necessary and strictly consequential. When Parliament passed the Employment Rights Act 2025, it took the clear policy decision to bring the criminal enforcement functions of the Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority into the new Fair Work Agency. Those functions include the ability for the GLAA, as provided for in schedule 4 of the Investigatory Powers Act 2016, to obtain authorisations to acquire communications data in the most serious cases of labour exploitation.

The sole purpose of this instrument is to ensure that this capability continues seamlessly when the Fair Work Agency becomes operational in April. It updates the statutory reference that currently names the GLAA, so that the same powers are available to the new agency when carrying out serious exploitation investigations that were previously undertaken by the GLAA.

Let me be clear about what the draft regulations do not do: they do not create new investigatory powers; they do not widen the scope of existing powers under the 2016 Act; and they do not lower statutory thresholds, alter authorisation routes or touch surveillance, entry or financial investigation powers. All those sit in primary legislation and remain entirely intact. This statutory instrument simply avoids an unintended enforcement gap following the transition.

Members of the Committee may also have noticed that an earlier version of this instrument was withdrawn. This was done to correct a technical drafting point where the original text duplicated a removal of the GLAA from schedule 4 that already occurs automatically under the primary Act. The corrected instrument before the Committee today makes no change to substance or policy.

Turning briefly to safeguards, communications data is not the content of calls, texts or emails—it is the who, when and where, not the what. In practice, this means information such as subscriber details, phone numbers, call durations, IP addresses, email logs and location data from mobile devices, but never the content itself. It can only be acquired by the Fair Work Agency for serious criminal investigations—that is, for offences that carry at least a 12-month custodial sentence, and only when necessary and proportionate.

In practice, the GLAA has used these powers sparingly, and only in some of the most complex and organised exploitation cases, often where victims are too frightened or unable to come forward. Those safeguards carry over in full to the Fair Work Agency. Every application will continue to go through single point of contact gatekeeping, and routine cases will continue to require authorisation by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office, which will continue to inspect and oversee use of these powers, exactly as now.

It is worth underlining that the value of these powers lies not in their frequency of use but in their precision. Communications data is a targeted tool that helps investigators build a clearer picture of organised exploitation, where victims may be isolated, threatened or unable to speak freely. It allows enforcement bodies to corroborate other intelligence and identify links between offenders and locations. Used properly, and under strict oversight, it is a vital element of the wider framework that Parliament has already put in place to confront the most serious forms of labour abuse.

To illustrate the value of these powers in practice, I can point to a recent case in which communications data played a vital role. Forty one vulnerable workers were brought to the UK with promises of decent work and accommodation, only to be exploited by an organised group. Their wages were taken, false identities were created and they were housed in unsafe and overcrowded conditions. Managers within the employing business even assisted the exploitation by diverting wages and acting as unlicensed gangmasters. Access to communications data enabled investigators to uncover the links between the organisers and those inside the firm, revealing patterns of wage diversion, false accounts, excessive deductions and, crucially, further victims. Faced with that clear evidence, the offenders pleaded guilty and received custodial sentences.

On transparency, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner will continue to report annually on the use of the powers, providing Parliament with a clear overview of how they are exercised. Additionally, the Fair Work Agency will report on its use of the powers in its annual report. As we bring three enforcement bodies together, the aim is a clearer system for workers and a simpler one for responsible employers.

Those who exploit workers, particularly through coercive, abusive or criminal practices, must not be given the opportunity to exploit gaps during transition. Ensuring the continuity of capability from day one of the Fair Work Agency is essential to that. The draft regulations provide that continuity without changing the law on when or how investigatory powers may be used, without broadening the Investigatory Powers Act and without altering any of the strong safeguards that Parliament has put in place.

This is a precise and technical instrument that ensures that Parliament’s decisions in the Employment Rights Act can operate exactly as intended when the agency becomes fully operational. I commend the draft regulations to the Committee.

--- Later in debate ---

[Kate Dearden]

I thank the shadow Minister for her contributions and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for her support for this statutory instrument. It might be helpful for me to run through the purpose of the particular SI, which I hope I made clear in my introductory remarks. I will touch on a few things that the shadow Minister has raised.

To repeat: we are replacing one specified body with a successor. The Fair Work Agency’s remit, as debated across Parliament, is established in the Employment Rights Act, which brings together the existing functions of the GLAA, the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate and His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs’s national minimum wage enforcement.

On what the shadow Minister alluded to, the Act does include the delegated power to add further labour market enforcement functions in future, subject to new regulations and parliamentary scrutiny. However, this SI does not use that power and does not add any new enforcement functions; it is purely consequential. No new powers have been created previously under the GLAA, as I alluded to in my opening remarks. The Fair Work Agency will only be able to request the use of these powers to investigate offences under the GLAA’s previous remit, and for other offences added to the Fair Work Agency’s remit by the Employment Rights Act—which we debated.

For the sake of detail, the only offences in the FWA’s remit that meet the serious crime threshold in the Investigatory Powers Act that I talked about in my opening remarks are as follows: offences under the Gangmasters (Licensing) Act 2004 and the Modern Slavery Act 2015 that were part of the GLAA’s remit, and offences under section 1 of the Fraud Act 2006 that was added to the Fair Work Agency’s remit by the Employment Rights Act, and was debated in the House. The Serious Fraud Office can already request the use of those powers to investigate those offences. The offence of failing to comply with a labour market enforcement order under section 139 of the Employment Rights Act supersedes an offence under the Immigration Act 2016, which is in the GLAA’s remit. The GLAA has never sought the use of these powers to investigate the offence in the Immigration Act. Offences under sections 140 and 142 of the Employment Rights Act are for Scotland only and were considered by the House in Committee.

I hope that it is clear what we are debating today. The offences to which the power relates do not change, only the remit does. We have transferred over the powers of existing enforcement bodies, but added extra safeguards—at present, a warrant is not needed to enter a dwelling, for example. It is clear what this SI will do. Continuing as normal would weaken enforcement, which would not be good for businesses or those who are on the most vulnerable side of the labour market and who need the Government on their side to make sure that their rights are enforced and that they are supported at work, and to stop modern slavery.

That is why this SI is so important. It is disappointing that the Opposition will be voting against it—I thought that we would be on the same page—because the question today is whether serious labour exploitation investigations should continue uninterrupted, and when the new agency goes live. It is quite simple and technical, as I have alluded to. I thank the Liberal Democrats for their support and urge all colleagues to support this necessary legislation so that we can crack on with enforcement and support the agency in doing so.

Question put.