---

Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Bill [Lords]

Some Government Members have said that the Bill is a recipe for changing the economy, but, as my hon. Friend states, it is not. Some Members touched on religion and church worship. It is important that we do not simply touch on it and dander on about it for only 20 seconds of our contributions. For many people in this country, attending church on Sunday is important to their lives. It is important for their family life, their moral standing and for their life in the church and the standards that they maintain in their lives. That should not simply be brushed aside or briefly mentioned. Those who want to attend church—they have a right to do so—should be able to do that. Clearly, I understand Ministers' points. However, in the current economic climate, people are fearful about retaining their jobs and subsequently about annoying management. My hon. Friend the Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) made an important point about young people who are perhaps in their first few months of work and are asked to work the extra hours on Sunday. They feel that they have been there only a wee while and they need the job, so they will sign up to the extra hours straight away, even though they do not believe that they should have to do that. The Government need to take account of that. The management may not strong arm those people per se, but there is a clear mentality that suggests that, if they do not do as asked, they will miss out on other shifts and get a black mark against their name. That is the thin edge of the wedge. In the Budget debate a few weeks ago, there was little or no direct comment on the Chancellor's announcement about suspending Sunday trading law. However, the hon. Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch (Meg Hillier) raised concerns that"““the move could be a trial run for a permanent change in the law.””—[Official Report, 21 March 2012; Vol. 542, c. 860.]" The Bishop of Chichester said in the House of Lords that he was concerned that removing all restrictions for eight weeks"““sounds suspiciously like a stalking horse for the wider deregulation for which some large retailers have been campaigning for a long time.””—[Official Report, House of Lords, 22 March 2012; Vol. 736, c. 1042.]" Not to be outdone, the Chancellor confirmed that the suspension would be a temporary measure, but added that the Treasury could ““learn lessons”” from the experiment. What lessons will the Treasury learn?