My hon. Friend makes an important point. The Labour Back Benchers' case is effectively blowing the Government's case out of the water in Brussels, gravely disadvantaging business in this country and our reputation in Brussels. The Government know that, but they are being forced into that position. That is not the subject of the resolution that we are considering, but the matter will be tackled in Committee.
If all that were not bad enough, the Government have kept digging. In a weak attempt to stall the unions and their own Back-Bench rebels, they have attempted to broker a deal on the Bill and the EU directive by proposing a UK commission made up of business and union nominees, although neither business nor the unions seems enthusiastic about the proposal. Having suggested the commission, why do the Government not want to wait to hear its proposals before allowing the Bill to proceed any further? Do not the cost implications alone merit more co-ordination than they have yet been able to muster? Who is leading the process—the Minister or those sitting behind him? Is it not yet another example of a dithering and indecisive Administration?
Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill [Money]
Proceeding contribution from
Jonathan Djanogly
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 May 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill [Money].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
475 c672 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 02:07:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469743
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469743
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469743