Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Thursday 3rd October 2019 Commons Chamber

[The Attorney General (Mr Geoffrey Cox)]

The priorities of my office are set out in the published business plan for this year, but on the UK’s withdrawal—I beg your pardon, Mr Speaker, I am answering the wrong question. I also beg the hon. Gentleman’s pardon—[Interruption.] Nobody noticed probably, the answers being the same. I can only plead that I am getting your cold, Mr Speaker, and was up far too late this morning.

Again, I am not going to comment in detail on the content of Cabinet discussions, but the Supreme Court judgment undoubtedly represents a significant development in our constitutional arrangements. As I said the other day, it is important to take stock of the implications of that judgment not in the immediate aftermath of a ruling, but deliberately, carefully and thoughtfully. We should not jump to hasty conclusions. The UK’s exit from the EU will have profound ramifications for our constitutional arrangements. As I have said many times, I think that requires a coherent, careful examination, possibly through some formal channel, of the means by which we are to be governed after we leave the European Union. I am not enthusiastic about the prospect of parliamentary scrutiny of judicial appointments and, as I said in answer to an earlier question, the Government have no current plans to introduce such an appointment system.

[Mr Speaker]

I am glad that the Attorney General eventually reached the matter of judicial appointments. That was very reassuring, not least for the hon. Member for Linlithgow and East Falkirk (Martyn Day).

[Martyn Day]

I am grateful for the Attorney General’s answer, and I heard his response to the previous question, but can he categorically rule out any changes that could result in a political appointment system, as I think that is an important point?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Wednesday 16th January 2019 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Apart from his enormous talent, can I agree with the Secretary of State more widely about Andy Murray? He is the embodiment of guts and character, and the most terrific ambassador for Scotland, for tennis and for sport. His mother Judy must be the proudest mother in the world.

[Martyn Day]

The Tories’ obsession with slashing immigration to the tens of thousands will see Scotland’s working-age population decline by 4.5%—that is 150,000 people—by 2041. Is the Secretary of State happy standing over such a policy that will cause economic harm to our country?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Thursday 6th December 2018 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I had no previous notice of that intended grouping, but it is, as far as I can see, unexceptionable.

[Martyn Day]

The average EU citizen living and working in Scotland contributes £10,400 a year in tax revenues. Does the Minister think it is acceptable to cut the Scottish tax intake by £2 billion by 2040?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Thursday 7th September 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

Order. We had not moved on to a new question. We were on the same question, but two different Ministers appeared at the Dispatch Box. The hon. Member for Dover (Charlie Elphicke) should feel very gratified to have a dedicated Minister to attend to his particular inquiry. That is something he can tell his grandchildren in years to come.

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.

Redundancy Modification Orders

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Wednesday 12th July 2017 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

rose—[Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am saddened by the speedy exit—

[Mr Speaker]

But not surprised, says the First Secretary of State. I am saddened by the speedy exit of large numbers of Members. If there are so many Members who wish to leave and who do not wish to hear the oration of the hon. Member for Linlithgow and East Falkirk (Martyn Day) on the subject of redundancy modification orders—a quite unaccountable departure on their part—I hope that they will leave the Chamber quickly and quietly so that the rest of us can listen to the oration of the hon. Gentleman.

[Martyn Day]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am grateful to you for allowing me this opportunity to raise the issue of redundancy modification orders—or, to use the full Sunday name, the Redundancy Payments (Continuity of Employment in Local Government, etc.) (Modification) Order 1999.

As the name implies, the order acts to preserve continuity of employment where an employee moves between certain local government, and indeed some other identified, positions. Pretty much every type of job that once belonged to the local government family is covered by the RMO, with a wide range of bodies listed. To illustrate that, the list already includes bodies in my constituency, such as West Lothian Leisure Ltd, and others including the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, Scottish Water, the Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care and the Scottish Social Services Council, to name just a few.

I refer Members to the order’s explanatory notes, which describe its effect quite clearly:

“The Order modifies certain provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 concerning redundancy payments, in their application to persons employed by certain local government employers or other employers in related sectors. The modifications have the effect that the employment of such a person by more than one such employer may be treated as if it were continuous for the purposes of those provisions; and re-engagement of such a person, or an offer of re-engagement made to such a person, by any such employer is treated as if it were re-engagement, or as if the offer had been made, by that person’s employer.”

In ordinary language, that means that the order deems certain successive employments as continuous, and the provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996 would apply as if the individual had been employed by the same employer throughout the entire period.

If an employee under notice of redundancy receives a job offer from another listed body on the modification order and starts the new role within four weeks of the end of their old job, they are considered to have continuity of employment. If an employee decides during the first four weeks not to continue with the new job, they will be able to terminate the contract, and they would be entitled to receive any redundancy payments from the old employer. However, no continuous service accrued under the redundancy modification order applies to anything other than the redundancy payment. Such continuous service fails to entitle employees to any additional annual leave or other benefit over and above that of their contractual entitlements.

While the order treats certain types of successive employments as continuous, it does not preserve continuity if there is a break in service. The order has been amended a number of times to include new employments, with the last amendment being in 2015.

The crux of the issue, and the reason for this debate, is the lack of progress made on updating the order, and the impacts of this on employees’ rights and continuous service benefits—benefits such as pension and annual leave entitlement, as well as the calculation of redundancy payments. Many terms and conditions of local government employment are linked to continuous service, so the impact of changing employers extends far beyond redundancy rights, affecting other entitlements, such as sickness allowance and maternity pay.

The lack of an update to the order means that a number of organisations across the UK have yet to be included in the order, despite applying for inclusion—in some cases, several years ago. One such organisation is the Falkirk Community Trust, which applied for inclusion shortly after its establishment in 2011. Its application has been considered, and the trust has been approved for inclusion in the schedule of bodies in the order. To date, this inclusion has not taken place and has been beset with delays.

The Government stated in 2015 that the order would be updated in due course. As the House will be aware, the Department for Communities and Local Government administers the local government redundancy modification order on behalf of the UK Government and the devolved Administrations in Scotland and Wales. I have been told in answer to parliamentary questions that the Department is

“actively looking at options on taking forward the Redundancy Modification Order and will update relevant organisations in due course.”

NHS Shared Business Services

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Tuesday 27th June 2017 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

The NAO’s findings are deeply concerning for the families of patients caught up in this chaotic shambles. For those involved and the wider public, this will only deepen their mistrust and misgivings in how the Tories are running the NHS; we can be grateful that they are not in charge in Scotland. Surely it is simply astonishing that a company partly owned by the Department of Health failed to deliver 500,000 NHS letters, many of which contained information critical to patient care. Not only were 1,700 people potentially at risk of harm, but thousands of others were put at risk. Was this SBS contract properly scrutinised by the Secretary of State? Was patient care or cost-cutting at the forefront of that decision? Why did he publish a vague written statement in July 2016 when he actually knew what was going on four months earlier?

[Mr Speaker]

Splendid—the hon. Gentleman was within his time. He gets an additional brownie point.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Monday 23rd January 2017 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

On this immigration-related matter, I would call the hon. Member for Linlithgow and East Falkirk (Martyn Day) if he were standing, but if he does not stand, I will not.

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

21. This Government’s immigration policies are separating rather than uniting families because of the ridiculous financial thresholds and restrictive rules on evidence of financial support. When will these rules be changed to support the real needs of family units?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Wednesday 7th September 2016 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

T2. The Bathgate office of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, which serves my constituency, is to close by 2020 as part of the modernisation programme, with services moving online. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. The situation is intolerable. The hon. Gentleman is entitled to be heard and Ministers are struggling to do so. I want to hear the hon. Gentleman—he can be assured of it.

[Martyn Day]

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

During the recess, the Government Digital Service lost its second director general within a year and the Government received the resignations of the chief digital officers of two other Departments. As services are removed from local communities, what steps is the Minister taking to get the Government’s digital provision under control and to ensure that people have access to reliable online services?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Thursday 14th April 2016 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. You caught me by surprise.

Last July, the Prime Minister—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. You should start by just saying, “Question 11”. You can build up to your peroration ere long.

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

11. What steps her Department plans to take to encourage businesses with fewer than 250 employees to close the gender pay gap.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Thursday 3rd March 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We are all better informed.

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

Nuisance calls are increasingly annoying to me and many of my constituents—the problem may affect people in Scotland more adversely, with nine out of 10 residents claiming to have had them in any given month—and 30 March will mark the second anniversary of the DCMS report, “Nuisance Calls Action Plan”. What plans does the Secretary of State have to publish a revised plan, detailing what success the first plan has had and what future action can be taken to tackle the problem?

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Tuesday 5th January 2016 Commons Chamber

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

T9. Yesterday, the Minister’s offer to junior doctors had still not dealt with the important issue of weekend working and appropriate compensation. As a result, doctors in England will be forced to strike and the Minister will have damaged the patient safety he claims to value. Instead of attacking consultants and junior doctors, will he follow the example of the Scottish Government and work with the medical profession to help the NHS face the challenges of increased demands and private finance initiative-induced deficits?

[Mr Speaker]

Project, man, project! We wish to hear the full gist of what the hon. Gentleman has to say to the House.

Points of Order

Debate between Martyn Day and John Bercow

Wednesday 21st October 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I understand entirely what the hon. Gentleman is saying. My own feeling from the Chair is that the other place can look after itself; but we also can and will look after ourselves. I think it would be much more dignified for the Chair not to become drawn into what might be a public spat between the two Houses. In the final analysis, each House knows what the factual constitutional position is, and that position is what it is of long standing.

[Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) (SNP)]

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Thankfully, the Prime Minister is not driving an Alexander Dennis bus, because his Scottish geography is somewhat askew. The plant is in the neighbouring constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (John Mc Nally).

[Mr Speaker]

I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his ingenuity and wit, but I have a hunch that he is trying to continue an argument that took place a few moments ago, and he would not expect me to join in. We will leave it there.



Bill Presented

Sugar in Food and Drinks (Targets, Labelling and Advertising) Bill

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Geraint Davies, supported by Jeremy Lefroy, Mr Mark Williams, Mrs Madeleine Moon, Dr Julian Lewis, Martyn Day, Helen Goodman and Angela Rayner, presented a Bill to require the Secretary of State to set targets for sugar content in food and drinks; to provide that sugar content on food and drink labelling be represented in terms of the number of teaspoonfuls of sugar; to provide for standards of information provision in advertising of food and drinks; and for connected purposes.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 20 November, and to be printed (Bill 82)