Clause 2 - Short title, commencement and extent

Part of National Minimum Wage (Enforcement Notices) Bill [Lords] – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:15 am on 27 February 2003.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Henry Bellingham Henry Bellingham Shadow Minister (Trade and Industry) 9:15, 27 February 2003

We certainly support the clause, and I am grateful to the Minister for explaining technicalities regarding the devolved Assemblies.

Clause 2(2) says:

''The Act comes into force at the end of the period of two months beginning with the day on which it is passed.''

We talked about that on Second Reading, but I want to return to it because the Minister should be aware that the Bill relates to a vulnerable group of people. Will the Minister give the Committee an update on how many cases are currently on hold as a result of the Bebb decision? A figure of 250 was mentioned in another place, but that was a few months ago so I assume that the volume of cases on hold is building.

Obviously, people's entitlement will not be changed and they will receive interest on the outstanding amount. However, will the Minister explain why we must wait for two months after the Bill receives Royal Assent before it comes into force? There are plenty of precedents of Bills coming into force immediately after receiving Royal Assent. I remind him that in recent

years, the Education Act 2002, the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, the Armed Forces Discipline Act 2000 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000 all came into force immediately.

The Statute Law Society examined 105 Acts that were passed in the 14 months between January 1978 and April 1979. It found that 41 Acts came into force on the exact day on which they were passed. Twelve Acts came into force on a date specified in those Acts, which is fair enough because some Acts specify a future date. Only 14 Acts came into force after the expiry of two months.

On Second Reading, the Minister did not convince Opposition Members about the two-month period. This mini Bill is designed to correct a decision that the Government rightly thought was wrong and that we all thought removed an important provision on entitlement in the original legislation.

As I mentioned, the relevant people have been poorly treated and they are a vulnerable group of workers on low pay. Although people's ultimate entitlement will not be compromised, a two-month wait is a long time for them. They might be in another low-paid job, or out of work, so they will be looking forward to receiving their just dues. Why should they wait? That does not make sense. There is no reason why the Bill cannot come into effect immediately, unless the Minister can explain why, if it did come into effect, it would set some form of precedent or lead to technical difficulties.