Compensation Bill [Lords]

The hon. Gentleman makes his case very well. The concept that we have sought to capture by the term ““desirable activity”” is the well-established one of taking the wider social value of activities into account. That reflects the existing law. The courts are already able to—and do—take these matters into account when considering all the circumstances of an individual case. My hon. Friend the Member for Sherwood raised his concern, and the concerns of the TUC, in relation to the impact of clause 1 on certain employees. May I try to reassure him? It is suggested that clause 1 would change the law so as to put at a disadvantage those who are employed in public service occupations that are arguably desirable, such as firefighting, compared with those employed in commercial operations such as retail sales, which may not be seen as desirable. However, that is not correct. It appears to be based on a misconception, first, as to the purpose and meaning of the term ““desirable activity”” and, secondly, as to the existing law. That is to say that the approach of the courts is to balance risk and the effect of preventive measures on an activity. On the first point, ““desirable”” was expressly chosen by parliamentary counsel as a term wide enough to encompass the wide range of existing case law—in contrast to terms such as ““socially useful””.