Hansard

During the previous debate, I observed that 11 members were in the chamber. I see that we have now increased that number dramatically—to 17. Such is the quality of the debate this afternoon that members are flooding in to hear our exchanges. I hope that we can improve that quality as we go on.

The legislative consent motion that is before us relates to the Employment Rights Bill, which, as we have heard, is UK-wide in effect. It is a wide-ranging piece of legislation that was introduced by the Labour UK Government, implementing plans that had been proposed in a Labour green paper published in September 2022. The bill covers a range of subjects, including the regulation of zero-hours contracts; greater rights for flexible working; removing the three-day waiting period for statutory sick pay; removing the qualifying period for paternity leave and ordinary parental leave; expanding eligibility for bereavement leave; providing employees with additional protection from harassment; and removing the two-year qualifying period for unfair dismissal claims.

Although Scottish Conservatives would agree with some of the measures that are set out in the bill, we have concerns about the overall economic impact of what is being proposed. Business organisations have expressed concern that the rules on unfair dismissal that it is proposed to change would make it less attractive for businesses to hire staff. One of the most vocal critics of the bill has been the Federation of Small Businesses, which has expressed concern about the impact, on smaller businesses in particular, of having to cope with 28 changes in employment law simultaneously. Similarly, the Association of Professional Staffing Companies has expressed concern that conferring day 1 rights would have adverse effects on recruitment practices for risk-averse employers, who might, as a consequence, look at methods of pushing those risks on to others in the supply chain, such as staffing companies. Those are the potential unintended consequences of the bill’s proposals.

Changes in employment law must strike a balance. On the one hand, giving greater rights to employees is generally beneficial. However, if that leads to additional difficulties for businesses in hiring staff, which make them reluctant to do so, the overall impact can be negative. We have to see that against a backdrop where Labour’s ruinous increase in employer national insurance contributions is already having a negative impact on the wider economy and on businesses’ ability to attract and retain staff.

As we would expect, the minister again set out the Scottish Government’s stated aim to see all employment law powers being devolved to this place. I understand why that is its position. However, that demand is opposed by business organisations across Scotland, which want to see a level playing field across the United Kingdom. That is particularly important for businesses that operate in all parts of the UK and do not want to run different regimes that apply to different members of staff. For an Administration that claims to support growing our economy, it is curious that the Scottish Government takes that particular approach when business is so firmly opposed to it.

The fact that Scottish Conservatives have concerns about the parent legislation is not, in itself, sufficient reason for us to vote against the legislative consent motion, so we will not do so. However, we have concerns that the legislation has been rushed through with insufficient thought and consideration of the wider economic impact. For that reason, we cannot support the LCM that is before us, but we will not oppose it.