Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Parental Leave

Thursday 17 July 2025 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 1 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Connor Rand organized an event to discuss extending paternity leave benefits beyond statutory minimums.
  • Robin Swann inquired about the Government's rejection of an amendment to the Employment Rights Bill aimed at protecting parents of children receiving palliative care.
  • The Government responded by stating they are committed to expanding workers' rights and family-friendly policies, emphasizing an evidence-based review approach.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Connor Rand Lab Altrincham and Sale West
Economy Employment Children & Families
Context

The question arises from the need for better support for working families through improved parental leave policies. Mr Rand organised an event with Labour colleagues, a union, and a campaign group where they discussed the benefits of extended paternity leave provided by businesses like Tesco.

Question

Improving our paternity leave offer will be good for parents, good for children and good for our economy. I recently organised an event with Labour colleagues, the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers, and Dad Shift, where we heard from Tesco about the benefits that six weeks of fully paid paternity leave had brought to its business. As part of the parental leave review, which I warmly welcome, will the Minister proactively reach out to businesses, such as Tesco, that are leading the way on paternity leave?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Justin Madders)

I thank my hon. Friend for his efforts in this area, and indeed for highlighting the excellent work that some businesses are already doing, going further than the statutory minimum. As we know, when it comes to supporting working parents, every little helps. This review will be evidence based. It will reflect and consider the views and experiences of those who engage with the parental leave and pay system. I encourage all businesses to contribute to the call for evidence, which was launched earlier this month. I can assure my hon. Friend that I plan to engage constructively with businesses, including Tesco and business representatives, throughout the period of the review.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Robin Swann Ulster Unionist Party South Antrim
Employment Children & Families
Context

Hugh's Law, which was proposed to provide job protection and financial support for parents of children receiving palliative care, was rejected by the Government during a vote on the Employment Rights Bill. This decision affects many families who have campaigned for this change.

Question

Hugh’s law would have brought in job protection and financial support for parents of children aged between 29 days and 16 years and guaranteed parental leave while those children were receiving palliative care. The Government voted down an amendment last night to the Employment Rights Bill that would have brought that in. This campaign has been fought by Ceri and Frances Menai-Davis, and many Government Back-Bench MPs have stood side by side with them through that campaign. Why has the Minister turned his back on those parents and those children?

Answer from The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Justin Madders)

We are not turning our back on parents or children. We are actually having the biggest expansion in workers’ rights and family-friendly policies that we have seen in a generation. Clearly, we will not be able to satisfy every issue in this area, but that is the point of the review. We are looking at the system in the round. It needs improving and modernising and that is what we intend to do.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific rejection of Hugh's Law amendment was not addressed directly; instead, a broader statement on family-friendly policies was given.

How: General Principles, Broad Statements

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)