Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Education

Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill

Claire Perry Excerpts
Tuesday 16th October 2012

(11 years, 6 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Matt Hancock Portrait Matthew Hancock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The 1974 Act does not give that protection, because a test of negligence is not required to proceed with a prosecution. In future, proof of negligence will be required to bring a case. It will be possible to bring a civil action for a breach of common law duty of care only on the basis that the employer has been negligent.

Claire Perry Portrait Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am enjoying the Minister’s attention to detail on this important matter. Will he reassure us that this provision will not add to the burden for small businesses because of the process of providing proof? Has he done any number crunching to show what it will mean for the businesses that matter so much to Britain?

Matt Hancock Portrait Matthew Hancock
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend anticipates my speech, because this provision will reduce the burdens on business. It is difficult to know precisely by how much because businesses react not only to the letter of the law, but to the perception of the law. There are perceived health and safety requirements that go beyond technical breaches of the law, and we want to remove them. One can go to the new Government website and ask whether something is required by health and safety legislation. Many of the cases that are brought to the Government’s attention are not required by health and safety legislation. The problem is the perception of health and safety legislation. By including a reasonableness defence, we will help to remove the implied, expected and perceived burdens on business.