Lord Fuller:

Moved by Lord Fuller

46: After Clause 25, insert the following new Clause—“Disapplication of guaranteed hours provisions for sporting events(1) This section applies where the appropriate national authority has applied one or more parts of the sporting events framework to a sporting event.(2) Where this section applies, the provisions mentioned in subsection (3) do not apply in relation to an employer who employs a worker at an event that is to be treated as forming a part of the sporting event.(3) The provisions are— (a) the following provisions of the Employment Rights Act 1996—(i) sections 27BA to 27BZ, and(ii) Schedule A1;(b) Schedule 2 to the Employment Rights Act 2025.”Member’s explanatory statementThis Amendment disapplies the provisions of the Employment Rights Act 2025 which require an employee to give a worker on a zero hours contract guaranteed hours when a worker is working at a sporting event to which the sporting events framework has been applied.

My Lords, I rise to speak to my Amendment 46, which seeks to ensure that the organisers of the big events can be assured of an adequate supply of flexible labour and human capital to make the tournament a success in the few weeks every decade that the circus rolls into town. As we have seen with the World Cup this week and the Olympics in 2012, a month-long tournament can unite a nation. My grandfather ran in the 1932 Olympics; he was Britain’s fastest man. At that time, the Olympics helped dig America out of its great depression. Sport can do these things; it is why we want these events.

In sport, the favourite does not always win. You sort of have to feel sorry for the French. They had booked their tickets all the way through to Sunday and now they are flying home. There are no guarantees.

If the noble Lord’s grandfather was the fastest man, can he speed up his peroration so that we can get to the World Cup match?

Noble Lords:

Oh!

I am reminded by the Deputy Speaker on the Bench to the left of me that I have 15 minutes, although I do not intend to take that amount.

So there are no guarantees—not in this game. In 2012, there were 70,000 Games makers who contributed 8 million hours. There were many other employees involved in broadcasting, catering, cleaning, merchandising, ticketing, security, bar work and selling ice cream, all the way from Stratford to Portland Bill. Let us say it was 150,000 people in total. We celebrate that because, without those 150,000 people, the Games would not have been a celebration at all.

The problem is that these are temporary events and mobilising that sort of temporary labour is now illegal. The Employment Rights Act means that the ad hoc work that these tournaments need cannot be offered to people without a guarantee. That is incompatible with a Games of uncertainty, which depends on personal performance, individual events and knockout stages.

The only conclusion I can form is that the Government expect the organisers and contractors to underwrite these guarantees to the people selling beer, ice cream, et cetera. But who would sign up to such open-ended liabilities? The Government say they want to sweep away the uncertainty and risk of big events being in this country, but let us be clear: the Employment Rights Act provisions, in so far as labour is concerned, add high costs and regulatory risks that exist nowhere else in the world.

My Amendment is intended to be helpful. These events happen only once every decade and they are obviously temporary. We know that the hours cannot be guaranteed, because that is the way they work, so my amendment carves out the ad hoc employment from the Employment Rights Act, but only in so far as events that fall within the Sporting Events Bill, because I want people to take part to support the delivery of the tournament, put their shoulder to the wheel, grow as individuals and make the Games a success.

The Government either want to host these events or they do not. Nobody wants them to host these events more than me, so let us empower our negotiators and give them every chance of success, not hobble them with additional rules and regulations that do not apply elsewhere, potentially damaging the enjoyment and pleasure of going to the game and giving us the agony, once more, of coming second in that penalty shoot-out or tiebreak against other more enterprising nations who will beat us to the podium for the hosting rights. I beg to move.

My Lords, I just inform the House that although I did advise my noble friend that he had 15 minutes, I also advised him that I did not think he would be very popular if he availed himself of the full 15.

And you were right.

And I was right.

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his points, which we supported in Committee and support still. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, and my noble friend Lady Morris for their refereeing and look forward to the Minister’s response.

My Lords, very briefly, I do not think a worker on a special event should have any fewer rights than a worker on any other occasion.

My Lords, as we reach the final moments of play on Report, I am pleased to turn to Amendment 46 in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Fuller. It is clear that, in some circumstances, zero-hours contracts and contracts guaranteeing a minimum number of hours can benefit both employers and workers. However, without the appropriate safeguards, the flexibility they provide can operate disproportionately in favour of employers, leaving workers with greater uncertainty over their working patterns and income.

Any exclusions or exemptions introduced at this stage risk pre-empting the outcome of the Government’s ongoing consultation on reforms to zero-hours and similar contracts. Through this consultation, the Government are seeking evidence and views from stakeholders on reforms to zero-hours and similar contracts, including whether any exclusions or exemptions may be appropriate. It is important that the views of all stakeholders are fully considered before any decisions are taken on potential exclusions or exemptions.

The Government’s objective is to ensure that all jobs provide a baseline level of security and predictability, enabling workers to better plan their lives and finances. We encourage stakeholders from the sporting events sector to engage with the consultation and help inform the development of the policy.

I also note, in response to the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, that nobody would have believed she would have encouraged the noble Lord, Lord Fuller, to speak longer than necessary, given the circumstances.

With that, I will blow the final whistle on my remarks but I look forward to continuing commentary and debate, both on the Bill and on tonight’s match. I know all noble Lords wish the England team the best of luck and hope, indeed, that football is coming home. On the basis of the points I have made, I hope the noble Lord, Lord Fuller, will withdraw his amendment.

My Lords, I regret to say that the VAR review has said that we may need to go to extra time on this. This is a serious matter which gets to the heart of how serious we are about hosting these events. We need to encourage participation by individuals and everybody else to give opportunity to millions. I am really sorry, but I am not satisfied with the answers that have been given. I intend to divide the House and then we can all go and watch the game. Come on, England.

Ayes 129, Noes 188.

Amendment 46 disagreed.

Amendments 47 to 49 not moved.

Clause 27: Regulations