Labour Must Halt its War on Pubs
One pub is closing every day. And Labour’s ‘banter ban’ – Clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill – is only going to make it worse as pubs are left with the escalating bills to cover their legal costs and insurance cover. In the Telegraph, Toby calls on Business Secretary Peter Kyle to at least pause the bill’s commencement until the sector has recovered. Here’s an excerpt.
Dear Peter Kyle, I am writing to ask you to pause the commencement of Clause 20 of the Employment Rights Bill until the pub trade – and the hospitality sector in general – is better able to cope with the financial and regulatory burden of complying with it.
Pubs have never faced such a hostile business environment. The combination of soaring energy bills, increased National Insurance contributions and the reduction of business rates relief for pubs from 75% to 40% has meant pubs are now closing at an unprecedented rate. According to the British Beer and Pub Association, one pub is set to close every day in 2025, although some organisations, such as the Campaign for Real Ale, put the number much higher.
The Employment Rights Bill contains various clauses that will make life even more difficult for pubs, such as those outlawing the flexible working arrangements that many hospitality businesses rely on. But Clause 20, which will amend the Equality Act to make employers liable for the harassment of their employees by third parties, is the most egregious.
As I’m sure you’re aware, we’re not talking about third party sexual harassment, which employers are already on the hook for. Clause 20 would extend employers’ liability for other, much milder forms of harassment, such as jokes or opinions that an employee finds offensive or upsetting in virtue of a protected characteristic
If this was confined to remarks addressed to employees, that would be bad enough. But “harassment” has been so widely defined by the Employment Tribunal it includes anything overheard by an employee, even if not directed at them. Under Clause 20, employers will shortly be legally obliged to take all reasonable steps to protect their employees from indirect harassment. That’s why it has become known as the ‘banter ban’.
How can publicans be expected to shield their staff from overhearing offensive or upsetting remarks, given that many of their customers will have had a few drinks? …
Can I therefore urge you to pause commencement of the most burdensome of these measures – Clause 20 – until pubs are in a better position to meet the costs associated with it? If you do not, I fear your legacy will be to have presided over more pub closures on your watch than any other Business Secretary. Kind regards, Lord Young of Acton.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The last in a long, long list of penalties against pubs and hospitality, one of the biggest employers. I was once closely involved in CAMRA, local chairman. It’s a very sad day when the final pub in the village closes. Often the last outpost of community.
Yet another ‘Labour must … ‘ demand.
Why should they?
They hate free speech, the ability of people to congregate and chat, just like they hate your ability to travel, spend cash, pass your wealth to your kids.
It’s their agenda, based on envy and spite, and they are very good at it.
Saved me writing a similar comment. The question I ask myself is ‘What would life look like in a Socialist Utopia?’. Britannica has a piece on Thomas More’s Utopia, although it is not clear if the work was a parody or sarcasm, or political critique.
I bet there were no pubs or taverns though.
I do not think the elites are. When they think at all they are rather pleased that pubs are closing because they are outside their experience and they think pub goers are uncouth.
It’s clear from the history of the 20th century that the Left hates humanity as it is. The Left’s response to their own hatred is to try to bring the people they hate most (currently the white working class) under rigid micro-managed control. This requires control of thoughts, ideas, speech. For this reason pubs must be brought under control or destroyed. After all, they are places where the hated non-conforming people can meet, talk, and exchange ideas and information (bearing in mind that according to the Left information that it cannot control is now “disinformation”). So it’s only natural that “our” government should seek to make the operation of pubs increasingly difficult. The ultimate aim to to make the operation of pubs impossible.
Nasty, filthy places where racist stupid people who didn’t go to Uni say wrong and bad things.
Reading the comments I see we’re singing pretty much from the same hymnsheet.
For labour this is a feature not a bug.
I suspect that at a fundamental level the Left do not see people as ‘fallen’ (as in some religions) so much as ‘not yet risen’. And it’s the Left’s job to ‘facilitate’ that rise.
Labour ate of course delighted because pubs are presumably splendid venues for dissent.
And far right discourse, such as saying true things, which is kryptonite to the commies.
But pubs are where people discuss things, share ideas and criticise regimes.
Starmer prefers the DAVOS set which is where Klaus Schwab gets to discuss his plans for reimagining the world. Here is a small sample of his wishes from his book COVID-19: The Great Reset. Notice the one from page 157 and within the general context of all. Page 142 – This brings us to the all-important question of whether the pandemic will eventually exercise a positive or negative effect on climate change policies. “A Great Reset is necessary to build a new social contract that honours the dignity of every human being,” added Schwab “The global health crisis has laid bare the unsustainability of our old system in terms of social cohesion, the lack of equal opportunities and inclusiveness. Nor can we turn our backs on the evils of racism and discrimination. We need to build into this new social contract our intergenerational responsibility to ensure that we live up to the expectations of young people.” Page 153 – Technological Reset We will see how contact tracing has an unequalled capacity and a quasi-essential place in the armoury needed to combat COVID-19, while at the same time being positioned to become an enabler of mass surveillance. Page 156 – Accelerating… Read more »
https://thecritic.co.uk/when-england-has-lost-its-pubs-it-will-no-longer-be-england/
Aa valid now as it was in 2021. I have been posting virtually since joining DS that government was intent on closing our pubs and that’s five years.
And as a minor point let’s not forget that one landlord kicked Kneel out of his pub, a scene which was delightful to behold but which clearly hurt and enraged the chief goon. I am sure he will be delighted at the future prospects of our pub industry.
Isn’t it interesting and quite odd that companies (in this case pubs) are liable for their customers behaviour? Aren’t the customers themselves the people who should be in trouble if they break the law?
And pubs aren’t the only industry on the hook for their clients behaviour.