Louise Haigh (Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab) (Urgent Question): To ask
the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on
the conduct of P&O Ferries’ chief executive and board and the
action the Government will take to safeguard jobs. The
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Robert
Courts) I know that the whole House has been left appalled and
angered by the behaviour exhibited by P&O Ferries towards its
workers over the last...Request free
trial
(Sheffield, Heeley) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if
he will make a statement on the conduct of P&O Ferries’ chief
executive and board and the action the Government will take to
safeguard jobs.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport ()
I know that the whole House has been left appalled and angered by
the behaviour exhibited by P&O Ferries towards its workers
over the last week. As a Government, we will not stand by and
allow hard-working, dedicated British staff to be treated in such
a manner.
This morning, my right hon. Friend the Transport Secretary wrote
to the chief executive of P&O asking him to pause and
reconsider and to offer his workers their jobs back on their
previous terms, conditions and wages, should they want them. That
is because we will return to the House to announce a package of
measures that will ensure that the outcomes that P&O Ferries
is seeking to achieve through this disastrous move to pay less
than the minimum wage cannot be seen through. As a result, it
will have no reason left not to reconsider its move.
As I said to the Transport Committee and the Business, Energy and
Industrial Strategy Committee last week, as soon as the package
of measures has been finalised, we intend to return to the House
so that Members can rightly scrutinise it. In the meantime, we
continue to review the contracts that P&O Ferries has with
the Government, and the Insolvency Service continues to
investigate the actions of Peter Hebblethwaite, who brazenly
admitted to breaking the law before two Committees of this House
last week.
I am clear that P&O Ferries cannot and will not be allowed to
get away with its actions. I hope the whole House will now
support our efforts to ensure just that.
I thank the Minister for that response. As he said, on Thursday
the chief executive of P&O Ferries made a mockery of the rule
of law in this country. As a result, seven of P&O’s eight
ferries are now stuck in port, and on Saturday the European
Causeway—the only passenger ship in Europe to be prevented from
sailing over safety concerns—was seized.
P&O Ferries must face the most serious consequences for its
misconduct. I know that the Minister and the Secretary of State
feel the same way, and I appreciate the contact they have made
with the Opposition and trade unions, but every available tool at
the Government’s disposal must now be used to force P&O
Ferries to reinstate workers on the previous terms and
conditions.
Will the Minister provide some urgent clarity? First, the Prime
Minister said very clearly on Wednesday:
“we are taking legal action…against the company
concerned”.—[Official Report, 23 March 2022; Vol. 711, c.
326.]
So has the Secretary of State given his direction to prosecute?
If not, why not?
Secondly, given that the chief executive has shown no respect for
the law, will the Secretary of State seek his removal under the
Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986, and the removal of
all those who authorised this unlawful action?
Thirdly, the Secretary of State has said he will review
contracts, but livelihoods are on the line now, so will he
suspend all contracts and licences of P&O and DP World today?
Why is DP World still listed as a member of the Government’s
trade advisory group?
Finally, time is running out. The deadline set by P&O for
this Thursday for workers to agree severance amounts to extortion
and has no legal basis. What powers do the Government have to
extend that unlawful deadline? As the Minister said, workers must
be reinstated on the same terms as before. Many are paid above
the minimum wage, so will he commit to working with the unions
and all ferry companies to agree a binding framework that will
prevent a race to the bottom to the lowest international
standards?
I know the House agrees that we must send a clear message that
rogue employers cannot get away with trampling over the laws of
this country. It is time to throw the book at P&O and save
this loyal workforce.
The hon. Lady is quite right that P&O must face consequences
for its actions. We are looking at every tool available to the
Government and doing so as fast as is humanly possible. We are
looking to bring forward a package of measures. I apologise that
I cannot go into any more detail at the moment—some of these
matters are complicated and we need to go through them—but we
will speak to Members and to the unions as we put the package
together.
The Secretary of State has made his views known very clearly, as
did I when I came to the House when the announcement was made and
when I appeared before the Transport Committee. The letter the
Secretary of State has written is absolutely clear about the view
we take of P&O’s actions, and we will act on that.
The hon. Lady mentioned several other matters. We continue to
review any contracts that may exist and continue to take any
action we can on things like trade advisory groups. I hope the
hon. Lady will pardon me for not going into detail at the moment.
We will come forward with a package of measures that we will
take, as I said we would when I was before the Select Committee.
We are putting that package together as I speak and will of
course work with the unions and all others as we do so.
(Dover) (Con)
I thank my hon. Friend the Minister and my right hon. Friend the
Secretary of State for working so closely with me and others
since P&O took this disgraceful decision. Does my hon. Friend
agree that the minimum wage proposal is a floor and not a
ceiling? It would put ferry workers in the same position as other
workers in this country and defeat P&O’s agency foreign
workers model, such that P&O should just reinstate the Dover
workforce now, on their current terms. Does my hon. Friend agree
that the Government measures that are coming forward this week
will support ferry operators and ferry workers and safeguard the
Dover-Calais route for the future?
First, I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for her fearless
championing of her constituents. There is no one who speaks out
with more persuasion, force and passion than she does for the
people of Dover and her constituents, and I pay tribute to her
for that. She asks whether the national minimum wage is a floor,
not a ceiling, and I am very keen to say that there is a package
we are considering. We will come to the House and explain what
that package is in due course, and I hope the House will look
forward to and welcome that when it comes.
Mr Speaker
I call the SNP spokesperson.
(Paisley and Renfrewshire
North) (SNP)
Can I, through the Minister, thank the Secretary of State for
what he has said and the content of the letter that he and the
Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
sent to P&O today? These actions have been utterly
reprehensible, but I do have to ask where the progressive zealot
intent on protecting jobs was when British Airways threatened to
fire and rehire 30,000 staff. If some action had been taken at
that point, we might not have been in this position today with
P&O. However, it is better that a sinner repenteth, and the
Government are indeed on the right side of the road now, which I
very much welcome, because the actions of P&O are abhorred by
everyone not just in this House, but right across the
country.
The Minister said in his response to the shadow Secretary of
State that he cannot give any details now, but can I please
reiterate that the deadline is on Thursday and this place breaks
for recess on Thursday? This is of the most urgent nature, and we
need details on that as soon as possible.
The Chairs of the Transport Committee and the Business, Energy
and Industrial Strategy Committee—this is my final question, Mr
Speaker—have written to the Secretary of State today with a
number of points, including stating:
“The Government should prosecute P&O Ferries and remove its
licence to operate in the UK.”
What consideration is the Minister giving to this action, and to
showing P&O that it cannot operate where it does not abide by
the law?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his question. He is quite right
that, in reality, this is something that unites the House.
Whatever party, wherever we come from and whatever our politics,
we are all disgusted by the way that P&O has behaved. He is
quite right, and I am very aware that the deadline is pressing,
which is why the Government are working so hard on this. As soon
as we are able to do so, we aim to come back before the House and
update the House on the package of measures we are looking to
take—[Interruption.]
Sorry; the hon. Gentleman reminds me, as I am on my feet, that
there are a couple of questions I have not answered. I will
consider the point he has raised about licences in particular,
and we can consider that as we are going along. I know that some
letters have been written. I have not yet seen those, but I will
be very keen to see the suggestions that are made in those as
well. As I said when I was in front of the Transport Committee
last week, I am very keen to work with the Select Committee and
the unions on any constructive suggestions they have made. If you
will pardon me for taking just a second longer to say this, Mr
Speaker, there have been some very constructive suggestions from
all sides of the House.
(Ynys Môn) (Con)
Stena is one of the largest employers in my constituency of Ynys
Môn, and Holyhead is the second busiest roll-on roll-off port in
the UK. The news about P&O last week was felt with palpable
anger and shock. I have spoken to Stena seafarers such as David
Gwatkin and Mark Harrison on the Stena Adventurer, and they are
quite rightly concerned about their jobs. Will the Minister
confirm to my constituents that he and the Secretary of State are
doing everything they can to ensure that this despicable, callous
behaviour never occurs again?
My hon. Friend speaks with enormous power and passion for her
constituents in Ynys Môn, and I pay tribute to her for that. The
distress felt by seafarers of all companies has been absolutely
palpable over the last week. Clearly, those at P&O are in our
hearts and minds, but equally there are those with other
operators who are worried about their livelihoods. It is
precisely the case that we are taking the time we are because we
want to be able to provide the reassurance to others, no matter
where they work or who they are employed by, that their
livelihoods will be secure.
(Bootle) (Lab)
I appreciate the Minister’s comment about DP World or P&O
Ferries being on the advisory group, and that he will look at
this as part of a package, but can he just tell us today whether
part of that package is going to be to take DP World off the
Government’s advisory body? That would send a fantastic message
right now to the company that its behaviour is unacceptable. Will
the Minister send out that message now, not ask us to wait for
the package?
I do apologise to the hon. Gentleman, because I know that he
would like me to say a number of things and to send such a
message now. The message will be sent. I hope he will forgive me,
but I want there to be a package that we announce to the House so
that the House can scrutinise it, rather than announcing things
piecemeal. We will come to the House, and we will explain what
all those are.
(East Devon) (Con)
I thank my hon. Friend for the strength of the Government’s
response to the moral bankruptcy that P&O Ferries
demonstrated at the Select Committee last week, and I welcome the
Government’s commitments to protect seafarers in the future. Does
my hon. Friend agree that every step needs to be taken to ensure
that seafarers are properly protected in the future?
Moral bankruptcy is precisely the point; my hon. Friend puts his
finger on it. We are taking every step. We will come forward with
a package. We want to make sure that we get this right and are
keen to make sure that people are protected.
(Kingston upon Hull East)
(Lab)
We know that the unions met P&O Ferries on
Friday—unsurprisingly, perhaps, the company was treating those
unions with utter and complete contempt. I think the reason is
this: the penny has not yet dropped for P&O Ferries that,
very soon, legislation will come into force that will remove the
incentive to exploit foreign agency workers at the expense of
British seafarers. Will the Minister pick up the phone to P&O
Ferries today and directly ask the chief exec to extend the clock
for accepting what are essentially illegal offers? They are not
redundancy offers—they are illegal.
I thank the hon. Gentleman, who has been extremely constructive,
for his input into this issue. I am grateful for it; I am taking
it extremely seriously, and I am considering it all. I hope he
does not mind if I say that at the outset.
The Secretary of State has already done more than make that phone
call: he has written in no uncertain terms, in public, asking the
company to do precisely what the hon. Gentleman has mentioned. I
am not surprised that P&O has treated the unions with
contempt, as the hon. Gentleman says; that is how we have seen it
behave across the whole of this matter. It is deeply regrettable,
and I urge the company to treat the unions and its workers with
respect.
(Stevenage) (Con)
I come from a family of seafarers. The behaviour of P&O has
been arrogant, disgusting and unacceptable. I am grateful to the
Minister for the strong action that he and the Secretary of State
for Transport have taken. Will they send a strong message to the
chief executive of P&O and say from the Dispatch Box that he
should resign for his behaviour?
Yes, absolutely. The Secretary of State has been absolutely
clear: he has said in terms that the chief executive’s position
is untenable, and I agree.
(Hayes and Harlington)
(Lab)
May I raise again the fact that the shipping companies have
received over £2 billion of tonnage tax concessions, and P&O
has been a major gainer from that? May we have an assurance from
the Government today that no tonnage tax relief is now being paid
to P&O and that, if necessary, we should seek to receive back
some of the tonnage tax concessions that it gained? Why did it
gain them? As a result of a commitment to protect and increase
the number of British seafaring jobs.
I confirm to the right hon. Gentleman that we will be considering
any actions that we can take. We will announce those as part of
the package.
(Wellingborough) (Con)
I am grateful for what the Secretary of State and the Minister
have done. I just do not understand how a minimum wage, which by
definition is a minimum, cannot be paid to people. Perhaps the
Minister can explain that to me.
I take what the Opposition have said; we really need to hear in
this House what the measures are. I understand why the Minister
wants to make a package of announcements, but will he ensure that
there is an oral statement before Thursday, when we go into
recess?
My hon. Friend is quite right, and I agree with him. The House
does need to know what the measures are, and we intend to return
to the House as soon as possible to make that statement.
(East Antrim) (DUP)
I also welcome the messages on safety, consultation and wages
that the Government are sending out. I have spoken to workers
affected in Larne, in my constituency. What they clearly want to
see is the kind of sanctions that will be placed on the company
to make sure that it obeys. As we have seen from the evidence it
gave last week, the company still seems to think that breaking
the law is okay.
The right hon. Gentleman puts his finger on the centre of the
issue—thinking that breaking laws is okay. We saw an
extraordinary display last week, when the CEO came here, brazenly
admitted breaking the law and said he would do it again. We will
make it absolutely clear that that is not acceptable. We will
announce later in the week how that will be done. I hope that the
right hon. Gentleman will pardon me if we delay until then.
(South Ribble)
(Con)
I have been speaking to people in South Ribble, and it is safe to
say that P&O’s reputation is absolutely in tatters at the
moment. Many people say that they will never use the company
again. Through the Minister, I thank the Secretary of State for
his strong letter this morning. Does the Minister agree that the
chief executive officer of P&O Ferries should strongly
consider his position?
I do.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
Following the question from the hon. Member for South Ribble
(), will one of the
package of measures that the Minister said he will be announcing
later this week be the removal of the chief executive as a
director, under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986?
Is that under active consideration?
I know a number of Members wish me to start talking about
individual measures, and I hope the right hon. Lady will forgive
me if I do not. We will come to the House and explain that
package of measures, and we are clear about the position of the
individual in question: his position is untenable and he ought to
go.
(Wimbledon) (Con)
Experienced crews are familiar with safety requirements. Will the
Minister assure the House that a full safety inspection will take
place before any vessel or ferry leaves port?
Yes, and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency has detained one
vessel to ensure that has taken place. I have total confidence in
the MCA, and it will ensure that any vessel is safe before it
sails.
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
Further to that question, surely the results of those inspections
will be published in full, so the public can have confidence in
what is being done. It appears that, as well as being in breach
of its duty to inform the Secretary of State about its
intentions, P&O is also in breach of its duty to inform flag
states. Do the Government intend to pursue that matter?
We are considering any options that may be relevant after the
actions of P&O last week. We will consider all of them.
(Newbury) (Con)
One of the most damaging concessions made to the Business, Energy
and Industrial Strategy Committee last week was that it was
cheaper for P&O to dispense with its section 188 consultation
obligations, and that it was more cost-effective for it to pay
800 protective awards and then move to agency worker rates of
£5.50 an hour—below the national minimum wage. It is doing that
by paying the British national minimum wage up to the limit of
British territorial waters, and then moving to rates of below £2
an hour. I know how hard my hon. Friend is working on this issue,
but we do not have such measures in the airline industry when
people move between jurisdictions. Will he look carefully at the
territorial limit of national minimum wage obligations?
I will indeed, and that is one of the issues we are discussing.
My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to it, and I thank her
for her expertise.
(Sefton Central) (Lab)
I was at the port of Liverpool on Saturday, and I met sacked
P&O seafarers from Liverpool and from Larne. They had come
across using a different carrier to show their solidarity with
their Liverpool comrades. They told me about the MCA inspection
in Larne, which kept the vessel in port. I will pass on their
message to the Minister: they want their jobs back on their
existing terms and conditions. They do not want just a review of
the licences; they want proper action. They want the Government
to show that they really are on their side, and not to leave any
doubts about whether they are on the side of billionaires from
Dubai.
I can be absolutely clear: we are on the side of the workers, and
we will explain what we are going to do in the House later this
week.
(Rugby) (Con)
I congratulate the Minister on the robust approach that the
Government have taken to this matter. Many small business owners
and managers work long and hard to get personnel matters right,
to do the right thing, and to comply with employment law. What
signal will it send to them if P&O Ferries gets away with
wilfully ignoring the law?
That is a signal we cannot have. We cannot have any company
wilfully ignoring the law, and we want to ensure that every
company knows that it must do the right thing.
(Birkenhead) (Lab)
The Government’s response to the mass sackings of 800 P&O
workers has been shameful. Ministers failed to step in and save
jobs, and in October they refused to support Labour efforts to
outlaw fire and rehire. They are not seeking to disqualify
P&O’s chief executive from holding a company directorship,
for brazenly and knowingly breaking employment law. Many of my
constituents employed in the maritime industry are afraid that
their jobs could also be under threat. Will the Minister urgently
commit to introducing legislation that will guarantee that the
strongest employment protections are available to everybody
working in the UK maritime industry, so that no one is ever
treated in as contemptible a way as the 800 P&O workers
were?
I do not agree with the hon. Gentleman’s way of describing the
Government’s approach—I do not think we could have been any more
robust—but the overall thrust of his point, that workers should
be protected, I agree with. We will come to the House and explain
how we are going to do that as soon as we possibly can.
(Eastleigh) (Con)
I welcome the Minister’s statement, but two of my neighbours and
constituents, with a combined service period of 51 years, were
laid off by email last week. They are understandably upset that
they do not know whether money is coming into their households
going forward. Can the Minister assure me that at the heart of
the package of measures he will be introducing—I understand he
cannot go into detail—are workers’ rights, so that in future no
company like P&O will be able to take such actions?
Yes, that is precisely what we aim to achieve.
(Gateshead) (Lab)
I was heartened when the Minister, in opening, said he will not
stand by and allow workers to be treated in such a manner, but
P&O’s arbitrary and illegal deadline of 31 March for all
sacked ratings to sign the severance package, which effectively
buys their jobs but also seeks to use a legal device to muzzle
them, is this Thursday. When the Minister says he is going to
bring a package to this House as soon as possible, as soon as
possible must be before Thursday.
The hon. Gentleman makes the point that the way these people have
been treated is not on. It is absolutely unacceptable. This is
complicated, so there are a number of things we just have to go
through to get this right. As soon as we can come back to the
House we will, but in the meantime the letter the Secretary of
State has written makes precisely the demand that the hon.
Gentleman asks for.
(North West Durham)
(Con)
I thank the Secretary of State and the Department for the robust
way they have taken on P&O over its disgraceful actions over
the last few weeks. Can the Minister confirm a couple of things?
First, will all contracts and relationships that P&O has with
the Government be under review? Secondly, will he block the
outcome that P&O is after, specifically trying to pay workers
less than the minimum wage? Thirdly, does he agree with me that
the CEO should either resign or be sacked immediately?
My hon. Friend makes a number of excellent points. We will
consider them as part of the package, but I can assure him that
the thrust of what he is seeking to achieve is the same as the
Government’s.
(Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)
The problem we have here is that we have had fire and rehire with
British Gas and British Airways, and I remember warm words from
Ministers just a few months ago but no changes to the outcome.
The words of my fellow Liverpudlian, Frank Cottrell-Boyce, that
Tory MPs protesting the behaviour of P&O bosses is
“Like your neighbourhood arsonist offering you a flask of tea
over the smoking ruins of your house”
come to mind. Will Ministers now look at whether they can commit
to securing a collectively bargained fair pay agreement for the
entire sector?
We will consider all suggestions made by hon. Members across the
House and I thank them for them. We will announce to the House in
due course the measures we propose to take.
(Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock)
(SNP)
What discussions has the Minister had with the Scottish
Government and other devolved Governments to discuss the impact
of P&O’s actions? What efforts has he made with Cabinet
colleagues to end the utterly despicable practice of fire and
rehire?
At a time like this, conversations take place across Government
and across the devolved Administrations to consider what action
we can take together.
(Islington North) (Ind)
I thank the Minister for his statement. I hope he introduces
legislation very quickly. In that legislation, will he also take
on board the scandal of the way seafarers are treated in
international waters generally—they suffer from low wages, poor
conditions and terrible working arrangements—which has been
exposed by the P&O scandal? We need to address the issue of
fairness and justice for all seafarers. As a major seafaring
nation, we can take the lead on that.
This country absolutely is a major seafaring nation and has taken
the lead already; for example during the pandemic when we were
the first country to declare seafarers as key workers and took
the issue of their rights to the International Maritime
Organization. I am very keen that we continue to take the lead.
The right hon. Gentleman puts his finger on a number of really
pertinent issues.
(Lewisham West and Penge)
(Lab)
Before I entered Parliament, I was an employment rights lawyer
for more than a decade, and in all that time I do not think I
ever saw such blatant disregard for the law or contempt for
workers’ rights. This Government say that that is wrong, but the
reality is that it has been allowed to happen under their watch.
They have failed to ban fire and rehire; they have failed to
extend the national minimum wage to seafarers; and if it was not
for the legal challenge from Unison, we would still have fees for
the employment tribunal. It is no wonder that employers think
they can get away with it. When are this Government finally going
to stand up for workers’ rights?
Unfortunately, the hon. Lady is just wrong on a number of points.
For example, in regulations from 2020 the national minimum wage
was extended to the vast majority of seafarers working on the UK
continental shelf, so she is just wrong about that. There is an
issue here that we are seeking to address, and we are addressing
it.
(Brent North) (Lab)
After Peter Hebblethwaite admitted to the Select Committee that
he had broken the law and would do so again, the nation has
concluded that he is not a fit and proper person to be a director
of P&O, or indeed of any company. When will the Government
also reach that conclusion and disqualify him? When will they
seek to ensure that workers onshore are not treated with the same
contempt as those seafaring workers have been, and make sure that
people cannot be fired in such a way, whether they are working
for Weetabix, Tesco, Sainsbury’s, British Airways, British Gas or
any of the other companies that have done the same thing over the
past two years?
The Government have reached the same conclusion as the hon.
Gentleman about Mr Hebblethwaite, and that is why the Secretary
of State has written to him in the terms that he has done today.
It is a matter for a court, not the Government, to disqualify a
person. That would be an unusual position for any Government to
take, as I know the hon. Gentleman will understand. We are
looking to see what else we can do to protect workers in this
sphere, as I have explained, and I look forward to updating the
House before the end of the week.
(Lichfield) (Con)
I thank my hon. Friend for taking such a robust stance on this
issue. May I invite him to make it absolutely clear that the
despicable action of P&O Ferries is not connected in any way
with P&O Cruises, because there is some concern about that?
P&O Cruises is a completely separate company, owned by a
separate organisation, and it is concerned that it may lose
bookings as a consequence.
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right that there is no
connection whatsoever between P&O Ferries and P&O
Cruises. They are wholly separate organisations, separately
managed. No blame whatsoever for the actions of P&O Ferries
attaches, or should be seen to attach, to P&O Cruises.
(Eltham) (Lab)
The chief executive of P&O came into this place where the
laws of the land are made and told us that he broke those laws in
a premeditated way. He went on to compound the situation by
showing scant regard for safety measures on his ships, resulting
in their being impounded. Knowing all that, does the Minister not
think that the chief executive deserves to be summarily
dismissed, and should the Minister not make sure that that is
done immediately, regardless of any package that he will bring
forward?
I entirely share the hon. Gentleman’s state of shock at the
statement that Mr Hebblethwaite made in front of the Select
Committee last week. The Secretary of State and I also share the
view that Mr Hebblethwaite’s position is untenable. We have told
him that he ought to go, and I urge him to take that on board
very seriously.
(City of Chester)
(Lab)
My hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull East () is absolutely right. These are
not redundancies, because the positions are not redundant; crew
are still needed to man those ships. The fact remains that it is
cheaper, quicker and easier to sack British workers than it is to
sack workers anywhere else in Europe. When the Minister brings
forward this package, will he have a discussion with the rest of
Government and say that the time has come for proper employment
rights in the UK?
I take on board entirely the point that the hon. Gentleman makes.
The most important thing we have to do now is to make sure that
the rights of those workers, and others in a similar position,
are protected. Government will be taking note of any lessons that
we might have to draw in the wider sphere, but it would be
precipitative of me to make any commitment about that.
(Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
The Minister has been given example after example of fire and
rehire this afternoon; every hon. Member, unless they have been
living on another planet, is acutely aware of all those examples
from the last two or three years. At what point will the
Government say, “This is wrong. It should be illegal”?
As the hon. Gentleman knows, this is not really a fire and rehire
situation, but we are absolutely clear that the way that those
workers have been treated is wrong. That is why I have said in no
uncertain terms that we are bringing forward a package of
measures and I will be able to update the House before the end of
the week.
(Jarrow) (Lab)
Will the Minister confirm whether the Government have received
advice from the Insolvency Service? If so, can he confirm that
P&O, simply by not notifying the flag states of the intended
redundancies within the prescribed time limits, has committed an
offence that could and should lead to an unlimited fine being
imposed? If not, will he bring forward legislation to correct
that position retrospectively and make that unlimited fine
happen?
It would not be normal for any Minister to comment on the legal
advice that has been given, but I share the hon. Lady’s concerns,
which is why we have asked the Insolvency Service to investigate
in these circumstances. I take on board her suggestion, as I do
those of all hon. Members, and we will update the House on that
package shortly.
(Leeds East) (Lab)
Dockers in Rotterdam refused to load freight on to a ferry in
support of 800 unlawfully and illegally sacked P&O workers.
Does the Minister endorse that action in support of saving those
800 jobs? If so, why is it good enough for workers and trade
unions in Rotterdam but still illegal in this country to take
solidarity action?
This is a Government who are standing up for workers. We have
been absolutely clear about our condemnation of the way that
P&O workers have been treated in this case and we will be
taking action, which I will explain in due course.
(Blaenau Gwent) (Lab)
The P&O pension pot has a shortfall of £147 million.
P&O’s parent company, DP World, has previously sponsored a
golf tournament to the tune of £150 million. Does the Minister
agree that P&O’s parent company should step in and pay up so
that workers’ pensions are secure for the future? Will he add
that to his package that needs sorting out?
I entirely understand the hon. Gentleman’s concern. I think that
DP World and P&O should get together, talk to their workers
and look after them, which they have not done so far.
(Rochdale) (Lab)
The Minister’s response there was interesting. DP World is the
parent company and has corporate responsibility for the actions
of P&O Ferries. Has anybody picked up the phone to the
Government of the UAE, who have responsibility for DP World, to
say that this situation is simply not good enough and not good
for their reputation?
We have been absolutely clear, when we have written to P&O,
that the decisions that it has taken are absolutely catastrophic
for its reputation and we have said the same thing to DP
World.
(Denton and Reddish)
(Lab)
The Minister is absolutely right that this is not fire and
rehire, because the P&O workers have not even had the
indignity of being offered back their contracts on lesser terms
and conditions. The flippant disregard for the UK workforce, the
contempt for the rule of law and the disgusting abuse of foreign
workers in what can only be described as slave labour are not
just wrong; it is not on. I hope that when the Minister comes
back to the House with his detailed package, we will be not just
tough in words but tough in actions and tough on P&O.
I agree with the hon. Member that the way that the workers have
been treated is absolutely not on. We have been absolutely clear
about that and we are keen not on words but on action.
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
What is worse is that DP World and P&O Ferries were prepared
to put untrained crew and passengers on to those ships and for
them to sail, which is completely against health and safety
measures. There is therefore something at the core of the
company’s culture that needs to be addressed and that must result
in the licence being removed, because it is clearly prepared to
be unsafe and break the law.
I understand the hon. Lady’s concern. The thing that I hope will
give her confidence is that we have the Maritime and Coastguard
Agency, in which I have full confidence; it is an outstanding
safety regulator. It inspects all those ships and if they are not
safe to sail, they will not sail.
|
