He does not. Perhaps the thought of all these schoolchildren being able to watch him on television will cause him to rise to his feet so that he could be identified.
I will not dwell on that matter any more, but the time scale and the view that a minimum period of one year should pass before the legislation comes into play is important. My view is that even one year would be too short a period, because that would create a cliff face. It may result in a large number of agency and temporary workers who have been employed for 11 months finding that their contract has come to an end, not because they are not up to the job or not providing a good service to their employers, but because the employers do not wish to take the risk of effectively taking them on as permanent employees. Therefore, my answer is that I think that a period far in excess of one year would be appropriate.
I hope that the promoter of the Bill will respond to the debate, particularly on this issue. The commission has been set up by the Government as a vehicle to avoid having to face up to what the Bill demands head on. I would be grateful to the promoter of the Bill if, when he winds up the debate, he is able to tell us how he envisages the time scale for that commission working.
Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Christopher Chope
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 22 February 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
472 c721 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:24:45 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_447896
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_447896
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_447896