Proceeding contribution from John McDonnell (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 February 2011. It occurred during Opposition day on Public Forest Estate (England).
Public Forest Estate (England)
No, I will not. TUPE does not even protect pensions. There is nothing to prevent a new employer from laying off staff while also undermining their conditions and pensions. I urge the Government to address the issue of their future. When I looked at the impact assessment to see whether there was any reference to it, I found that the only reference in the first seven pages related to redundancy costs. It reads as follows:"““Transition costs of redundancy, TUPE and possible further professional fees have not been quantified.””" That is repeated six times. It appears on each of the first seven pages of the document. There are real anxieties among this group of expert staff about their future. There are anxieties about a transfer to the voluntary sector. Most Members have been involved with charities—most of us have served on their boards—and we know how difficult it is to maintain a charity. In any charitable or voluntary organisation, about 30% of the time is spent on trying to find funds for future years.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 522 c956
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Staff Access Conservation Biodiversity Finance Forestry Commission Forests Ownership Privatisation English Nature Sales Rights of way Tree felling Cuts Woodland Trust
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-05-28 12:14:36 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_710141
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_710141
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_710141