Absolutely not. That is merely one aspect of a positive feature of the UK and a reason why companies wish to invest here. As I said, we want to maintain the best of flexibility while dealing with abuses. The evidence that we gathered led us to reject calls for an outright ban on zero-hours contracts, which some campaigning groups have argued for. Where we deal with abuse, we want effectively to ban exclusivity contracts when those do not guarantee any hours. There are two reasons for doing that. First, it is unfair to the individual that they are prevented from earning, but it also makes a nonsense of flexibility if employers prevent workers from migrating to work. Those are two good and powerful reasons for rejecting exclusivity arrangements, and they came through quite unambiguously in the consultation. Some 83% of 36,000 responses—a large number of responses—argued that such a ban should take place, and we will consult during the passage of the Bill on how we make that effective. Banning zero-hours contracts of any form is not straightforward, and some unscrupulous employers could simply shift to one-hour, two-hour, or three-hour contracts. We want to ensure that whatever we introduce is absolutely guaranteed.
Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Vincent Cable
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 16 July 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Small Business, Enterprise and Employment Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
584 c908 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2014-07-22 10:50:46 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-07-16/14071659000096
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-07-16/14071659000096
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2014-07-16/14071659000096