Chamber
Plenary, 07 Mar 2007
07 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Christmas Day and New Year's Day Trading (Scotland) Bill
Like other members, I congratulate Karen Whitefield on her bill and on raising important issues in the Parliament in the past couple of years.
We are discussing the bill today because our biggest department stores have for the past three years opened on new year's day—because there is money in it for them. We are here because there is clear evidence that their staff—the vulnerable retail staff so many members like to talk about when we discuss the issue—are being coerced into working on new year's day. I predict that, as a result of the Executive's amendments today, not only will that continue, but new year's day 2007 will be far busier than it was this year and far more stores will be open. In effect, the Executive has given the green light to employers that want to open.
When retail traders open on new year's day, that puts pressures on other sectors to open. Who here has not noticed that the tourism industry has been desperate for our tourist attractions to open, for the same reasons as it wants our department stores to open? The industry wants Edinburgh Castle and other attractions in Edinburgh to be open. Pressure will be brought to bear on public transport. Charlie Gordon rightly talked about trains. There will be a need for more buses and trains, so more bus and train drivers will have to work to get people to and back from the stores. Local authority staff, such as parking attendants and car park workers, will also be required to work. In other words, the retail sector will become the Trojan horse for a wider cultural change.
The impact on Scottish cultural life of new year's day becoming just like any other day will be widespread. In its evidence, the tourism industry overlooked the grave danger of strangling the goose that lays the golden egg. People come to Scotland for a unique experience at new year and hogmanay. By making the experience the same as what they can get in New Orleans, Beijing or Auckland, we will lose the imperative for people to come here.
The Scottish Socialist Party has supported Karen Whitefield's bill throughout the process. We are proud to work with USDAW and the Co-operative movement in supporting it. I fear that the amendments that were passed earlier this morning have rendered the bill, on which Karen Whitefield has worked for four years, absolutely meaningless. The minister made a plea to employers to consider their corporate social responsibility, but if employers took their social responsibility seriously we would not need a trade union movement. The fact is that employers do not take their corporate responsibility seriously. That is why we are considering the bill. The minister should not talk to us about employers' social responsibility just weeks after the debate on Farepak. The minister should tell that to the workers who used to work at Solectron or NCR, or to those who have lost their jobs in Irvine. The Employers' interest is to make profit. The minister's threats to employers and all she says about a code are so much hot air.
Murdo Fraser could not have been more wrong when he said that Labour and the Executive are in the pocket of the trade unions. I do not know whether his tongue was in his cheek, as he sits a long way from me in the chamber but, to be frank, the reverse is true. The Labour Party has not been comfortable with the bill from the beginning, which is why it has taken a view on it only this morning. It is trying to face two ways at once—it is electioneering and appealing to vulnerable retail workers, but it jumps to attention when the Confederation of British Industry speaks.
After the stage 1 debate on the bill, a representative of the CBI appeared quickly on television to say that it did not like the bill and did not want it as it would restrict trading. As far as I am concerned, the CBI's complaint that trade will be restricted is behind the amendments that the Executive lodged for stage 3.
During the debate on the amendments, one Labour member—I think it was Susan Deacon—expressed her discomfort, which I am sure other Labour members share, about the fact that we are considering an employment bill that is dressed up as a trading bill. They know fine well that the bill deals with a Westminster issue—employment—but that if it were considered at Westminster it would not have a chance in hell of being passed because Westminster would not support improved employment rights for trade unionists.
Cathie Craigie let the cat out of the bag when she warned Jim Mather that the big retailers are not against the bill—they are not against it now, because they are behind the Executive's amendments. Those amendments are a sell-out of vulnerable trade union members and vulnerable retail staff, who looked to the member's bill in the Parliament for help and assistance, but who have been left standing on their own.
We are discussing the bill today because our biggest department stores have for the past three years opened on new year's day—because there is money in it for them. We are here because there is clear evidence that their staff—the vulnerable retail staff so many members like to talk about when we discuss the issue—are being coerced into working on new year's day. I predict that, as a result of the Executive's amendments today, not only will that continue, but new year's day 2007 will be far busier than it was this year and far more stores will be open. In effect, the Executive has given the green light to employers that want to open.
When retail traders open on new year's day, that puts pressures on other sectors to open. Who here has not noticed that the tourism industry has been desperate for our tourist attractions to open, for the same reasons as it wants our department stores to open? The industry wants Edinburgh Castle and other attractions in Edinburgh to be open. Pressure will be brought to bear on public transport. Charlie Gordon rightly talked about trains. There will be a need for more buses and trains, so more bus and train drivers will have to work to get people to and back from the stores. Local authority staff, such as parking attendants and car park workers, will also be required to work. In other words, the retail sector will become the Trojan horse for a wider cultural change.
The impact on Scottish cultural life of new year's day becoming just like any other day will be widespread. In its evidence, the tourism industry overlooked the grave danger of strangling the goose that lays the golden egg. People come to Scotland for a unique experience at new year and hogmanay. By making the experience the same as what they can get in New Orleans, Beijing or Auckland, we will lose the imperative for people to come here.
The Scottish Socialist Party has supported Karen Whitefield's bill throughout the process. We are proud to work with USDAW and the Co-operative movement in supporting it. I fear that the amendments that were passed earlier this morning have rendered the bill, on which Karen Whitefield has worked for four years, absolutely meaningless. The minister made a plea to employers to consider their corporate social responsibility, but if employers took their social responsibility seriously we would not need a trade union movement. The fact is that employers do not take their corporate responsibility seriously. That is why we are considering the bill. The minister should not talk to us about employers' social responsibility just weeks after the debate on Farepak. The minister should tell that to the workers who used to work at Solectron or NCR, or to those who have lost their jobs in Irvine. The Employers' interest is to make profit. The minister's threats to employers and all she says about a code are so much hot air.
Murdo Fraser could not have been more wrong when he said that Labour and the Executive are in the pocket of the trade unions. I do not know whether his tongue was in his cheek, as he sits a long way from me in the chamber but, to be frank, the reverse is true. The Labour Party has not been comfortable with the bill from the beginning, which is why it has taken a view on it only this morning. It is trying to face two ways at once—it is electioneering and appealing to vulnerable retail workers, but it jumps to attention when the Confederation of British Industry speaks.
After the stage 1 debate on the bill, a representative of the CBI appeared quickly on television to say that it did not like the bill and did not want it as it would restrict trading. As far as I am concerned, the CBI's complaint that trade will be restricted is behind the amendments that the Executive lodged for stage 3.
During the debate on the amendments, one Labour member—I think it was Susan Deacon—expressed her discomfort, which I am sure other Labour members share, about the fact that we are considering an employment bill that is dressed up as a trading bill. They know fine well that the bill deals with a Westminster issue—employment—but that if it were considered at Westminster it would not have a chance in hell of being passed because Westminster would not support improved employment rights for trade unionists.
Cathie Craigie let the cat out of the bag when she warned Jim Mather that the big retailers are not against the bill—they are not against it now, because they are behind the Executive's amendments. Those amendments are a sell-out of vulnerable trade union members and vulnerable retail staff, who looked to the member's bill in the Parliament for help and assistance, but who have been left standing on their own.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5436, in the name of Karen Whitefield, that the Parliament agrees that the Christmas Day and New Year's D...
Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab):
Lab
Presiding Officer, I have great pleasure in moving the motion in my name. With your permission, Mary Mulligan, who is a supporter of the bill, will make the ...
Mrs Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow) (Lab):
Lab
I congratulate my colleague Karen Whitefield on introducing the bill, which will provide support for people throughout Scotland. I know that Karen Whitefield...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
Just do it now.
Mrs Mulligan:
Lab
I have done so.When I first came to Scotland many years ago to work in retail, stores closed for two days at Christmas and two days at new year. We always so...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
Would Mary Mulligan extend that criticism to her Liberal Democrat coalition colleagues?
Mrs Mulligan:
Lab
I would extend that criticism to any Liberal Democrat who held the same views as the Tories.As Karen Whitefield said earlier, the Conservatives have, as ever...
The Minister for Justice (Cathy Jamieson):
Lab
I congratulate Karen Whitefield on all the work that she has done on the bill over an extended period and in putting the case for how we should protect vulne...
Jim Mather (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
The SNP intends to support the bill as amended by the Executive and we echo much of what the minister has said. However, we recognise that the amended bill i...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
If Scotland and the Parliament had those powers and if Scotland found itself in the unfortunate position of having Mr Mather responsible for such decisions, ...
Jim Mather:
SNP
The member would find that there would be an enlightened social contract. For example, we are watching with great interest what is happening in Ireland, whic...
Bristow Muldoon (Livingston) (Lab):
Lab
Will the member give way?
Jim Mather:
SNP
Let me answer the first question. Under the national development plan that the Irish are putting in place, and which forms the physical framework for deliver...
Bristow Muldoon:
Lab
Will the member give way?
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
No. The member is in his final minute.
Jim Mather:
SNP
That is equivalent to £20 billion a year—or two thirds of the money available under the Barnett formula—for six years. Having that kind of proper structure a...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I will try to return to the subject that we are supposed to be debating. I commend Karen Whitefield for her efforts on this member's bill; even though I disa...
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
Will the member clarify a point? Mr Davidson had to move certain Executive amendments at stage 2, but it was not incumbent on him then to vote against them. ...
Murdo Fraser:
Con
If the Executive is not even prepared to move its own amendments, it can hardly expect other members to support them at committee.
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
I am talking about the way that the Conservatives voted.
Murdo Fraser:
Con
I am sorry, but Mr Purvis should not try to shift the blame for the situation.The trouble with the bill is that it tries to deal with two separate and distin...
Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
I thank Karen Whitefield and Mary Mulligan for their work on the bill. The fact that we have reached this point is a testament to their hard work and dogged ...
Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab):
Lab
I acknowledge the member's point—and appreciate her cheek at attempting to raise funds for charity at such an early stage. However, I am sure that she will a...
Margaret Smith:
LD
Well, they felt like work.I welcome the position that we have reached with the bill and, for the reasons that I mentioned earlier, I am pleased that the amen...
Cathy Peattie (Falkirk East) (Lab):
Lab
I thank Karen Whitefield and all the folk who have supported the bill, organisations such as USDAW and the Scottish Trades Union Congress, and the hundreds o...
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
What protection would it be appropriate to give to all the hotel workers who work over that busy period?
Cathy Peattie:
Lab
It is important that no workers should be forced to work. The Parliament could perhaps think about how to protect hotel workers and so on in the future, but ...
Mark Ballard (Lothians) (Green):
Green
I join other members in commending Karen Whitefield and Mary Mulligan for all the work they have done to progress the bill through the parliamentary process....
Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Will the member give way?
Mark Ballard:
Green
No. I am sorry, but I am just coming to the end of my speech.There is a clear difference between small-format stores and large retail outlets and I think tha...