I thank the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, for his comments. I am not sure exactly what my noble friend Lord James intended ““employee”” to mean. I accept the noble Lord’s view that the employer is the person, not the agency. The agency is just the middleman. The relationship is between the employee and the person who is the ““end user””, as he expressed it. I will accept that, and I imagine that my noble friend will also.
We hear all the time about young people who have problems, although some young people love a wild occasion and nothing worries them. I think that my noble friend was concerned about a young person who, as part of a group, goes to a place that he believes will be perfectly harmless but finds himself miles from where he started, is stuck and is unable to get out of the situation. In other words, he is faced with a situation that he never imagined he would have to face. I am sure that that was my noble friend’s motivation. His real concern is about the duty of care.
I thought that the Minister made very practical points about how to get parental consent. Everyone now worries that parents have no control over their children. That really is worrying. I understand the difficulties that people have with the practicalities, but I think that the onus remains on society to have a duty of care to young people. This matter needs more consideration. One needs to look into exactly the type of case that he was talking about and at when the cases are settled legally.
I thought that the Minister’s concerns about the statutory instrument passed in December were very interesting. This matter should certainly be looked at and, if it is found that there are deficiencies in it, as he believes there are, then they should be looked at. The Bill would provide an opportunity to remedy any defect in that instrument.
I am very grateful for the Minister’s comments, which my noble friend Lord James will be able to read in great detail. If my noble friend brings the amendment back, he will do so himself, which will be a sight easier for me. Meanwhile, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 16 agreed to.
Employment Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Gardner of Parkes
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 13 March 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Employment Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c299-300GC 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:27:30 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454869
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454869
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_454869