§
Motion made, and Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 15 (Exempted business),
That, at this day's sitting, the Northern Ireland (Sentences) Bill, the Crime and Disorder Bill [Lords] and the National Minimum Wage Bill may be proceeded with, though opposed, until any hour.—[Ms Bridget Prentice.]
§ Question agreed to.
§ Lords amendments again considered.
§ Question again proposed, That this House does agree with the Lords in the said amendment.
§ Mr. BoswellThe Minister is trying to be helpful. I have a procedural question, which is whether arrangements will be made for the tribunal to ensure that there is in the papers a box to tick, or some other way to enter the fact that a penalty notice has been served, so that the tribunal may look at both automatically and simultaneously, rather than finding out by accident that a penalty notice has been served. We must remember that there are relatively unsophisticated employers who may not be aware of double jeopardy. Is the Minister nodding or is he reflecting on that point?
Mr. McCartneyI assure the hon. Gentleman that I will take on board what he has said. It is important in the good employment practice followed in these cases that we should make it as easy as possible for both the employer and the tribunal to ensure that such matters are covered.
§ Mr. BoswellI am grateful to the Minister.
On the more general points, the Minister's explanation has been helpful, but I should like him again to confirm two matters. The first is that the enforcement notice and the appeal against it are free standing and that the penalty notice and the appeal against it are also free standing. They could happen separately. I have not quite thought 272 through the implications, but the tribunal could come to different conclusions in different cases. We need to ensure that no one's rights are removed.
The second matter relates to financial penalties for non-compliance. Although the tribunal will take an interest in the calculation—if that is brought to its attention because, for example, the employer says that the sums have been done wrongly—it is not empowered to rewrite the level of the penalty, other than for a mathematical mistake, if a liability has been imposed. Nor will it look at degrees of culpability as between employer and employee in reaching its conclusions.
While having regard to the worker's interests, these cases are very much ones where the employer will appeal against enforcement and, in particular, against the financial penalty. Clearly, the worker is enjoined in that and will want to have a say in it, but the case is very much about ensuring that the employer is treated fairly. The enforcement notice comes after due process, from either the employee or an officer acting on his behalf.
I am trying to get the flavour of the issue. The Minister has it broadly right, but it would be helpful if he could comment on it.
§ Mr. Ian McCartneyThe answers to the hon. Gentleman's first two questions are yes and yes. On his third question, I think that he—not for wrong reasons—is rather overcomplicating the matter. If there has been an error, the tribunal will ensure that it is corrected.
§ Lords amendment agreed to.