§ 3.3 p.m.
§ Earl Russell asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ What plans they have to implement their manifesto commitment to amend the law relating to the employment rights of pregnant women, to give effect to the EC Directive on Pregnant Workers and to give the right to at least 14 weeks' maternity leave and protection against dismissal on grounds of pregnancy.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Employment (Viscount Ullswater)My Lords, the Government will of course fulfil their manifesto commitment. The EC Pregnant Workers' Directive however has yet to be adopted.
§ Earl RussellMy Lords, I thank the noble Viscount for that reply. I believe that in general we are of one mind on this matter. Perhaps I may ask him more specifically whether he agrees that it is difficult to use the Sex Discrimination Act to prohibit dismissal on grounds of pregnancy because it is hard to find a comparable male condition? Would he therefore consider extending the Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978 to provide protection against unfair dismissal on grounds of pregnancy during the first two years of employment?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, I think that the answer to the noble Earl's first question is "No". There are other occasions which would be equally applicable to men as to women. After all, we are talking about time off from work and there are other occasions which would apply equally to men as to women.
The answer to the noble Earl's second supplementary question is that the situation about the directive 219 is as I told him. It is a question of waiting to see what happens to the directive before we take any steps towards its implementation or otherwise.
§ Baroness Turner of CamdenMy Lords, is the Minister aware that last year the Government promised Sub-committee C of the Select Committee on the European Communities that they were willing to abandon the two-year qualifying period for pregnancy leave? When may we expect to see that assurance fulfilled?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, as the noble Baroness will know, we made a manifesto commitment to implement the EC directive. At the moment that directive has run aground, perhaps on the insistence of Italy, but we need to make progress on that before it is adopted and then we shall fulfil our manifesto commitment.
§ Baroness Turner of CamdenMy Lords, perhaps I may come back on that. A definite promise was made to the Select Committee in November 1991. I am not at all certain that we need to wait for the directive before that assurance is fulfilled.
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, I believe that the manifesto commitment commits the Government to what is said in that manifesto commitment. I do not think that there is any change in circumstances.
§ Lord MonsonMy Lords, does not the noble Viscount agree that an employer should be neither better off nor worse off financially as a consequence of employing somebody of one sex rather than another? Therefore, if 14 weeks' paid maternity leave is to be brought into effect, should not the burden—and it is a burden—fall upon the state rather than upon the employer?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, we shall have to look very carefully at implementing the EC directive if it is adopted. At the moment we have comprehensive payment agreements and maternity allowances which are paid to pregnant women by the Department of Social Security, and those are very satisfactory.
§ Lord RochesterMy Lords, does not the noble Viscount agree that, irrespective of the fate of the European directive, it is up to the Government to implement their election manifesto commitment?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, while we have a live directive it is better to wait and see what happens to that rather than to anticipate it.
§ Lord DesaiMy Lords, can the Minister tell the House how well this country compares to other members of the European Community in relation to pregnancy leave?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, overall the package of maternity rights in the United Kingdom is very substantial. Legislation provides for the longest period of maternity absence in the European Community and, unlike in many other member states, 220 it gives the right to paid time off for ante-natal care. Also, unlike most member states the UK provides completely free medical care throughout childhood.
§ Lord Stoddart of SwindonMy Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that so far his replies smack of sleight-of-hand? Is he saying that the Government will implement these improvements only if the EC directive goes through? Is it not a fact that the Government may very well oppose the directive, which will not, therefore, go through because the Government have done just that?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, no, the Government are not opposed to the directive. The Government accept the common position that was agreed in December last year. When it comes to what action we will take during the course of our presidency, it is important that we should negotiate in order to see whether we can resolve the difficult situation in which we find ourselves at the moment.
§ Earl RussellMy Lords, does the noble Viscount agree that his answer, indicating that there are male conditions with which pregnancy could be compared, creates some problems? Does he agree that pregnancy is not an illness?
§ Viscount UllswaterMy Lords, I do not think that that was what I was trying to indicate. I was trying to indicate that pregnancy requires time off work. So do other conditions.