VM633 – End of Furlough Scheme Protection and Return to Work Motion 2020,

Watch
Poll: Do you agree with this Motion?
As many as are of the opinion, aye. (29)
63.04%
Of the contrary, no. (7)
15.22%
Abstain. (10)
21.74%
This discussion is closed.
Andrew97
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 1 month ago
#1
M633 – End of Furlough Scheme Protection and Return to Work Motion 2020, Miss Maddie MP

The live events sector is worth over £70bn to the UK economy in direct spending alone [1]. However, when people attend events there is a boost for the surrounding businesses such as hotels, restaurants and pubs. When the impact on the supporting businesses is considered, the overall contribution to the UK economy is significantly higher. Furthermore, the supply chain businesses providing services to support live events (equipment hire, specialist audio technicians, food production etc...) also see significant challenges [1].

Nearly 600,000 people are directly employed by the live events industry (this figure excludes employees in surrounding businesses and supply chain businesses). The furlough scheme ends in October and so far over 9.5 million workers have been furloughed. The furlough scheme is ending despite large-scale live events still being banned without a definitive date for their unrestricted return.

The majority of those 600,000 workers are still on furlough. For even the biggest companies, a 98% drop in revenue has meant job losses are certain and it is only a matter of time before jobs start going in the UK [2]if the industry does not restart before the furlough scheme ends. The situation is worse at smaller companies. It is predicted that up to 60% of the entire industry could be made redundant [3]. It should be noted that this 60% does not include the front-line staff on minimum wage and ZHCs who can simply not be given hours. That is 60% of full time, contracted staff!

To save the industry and the workers in the live events sector this House calls on the government to:

(1) Extend the job retention scheme, at the full 80% being paid by the government, for the sector to prevent redundancies.
(2) Provide the sector with a clear plan of when and how they can expect to open.

OR

(1) Allow all venues to reopen at full capacity on the 1st November.
(2) Recognise social distancing is not possible inside these venues and accept that masks could be worn instead as a requirement for opening at full capacity or testing conducted on arrival.

References

[1] https://www.business-live.co.uk/opin...-rest-18874444
[2] https://www.dailynews.com/2020/09/04...d-19-drags-on/
[3] https://www.installation-internation...nts%20campaign
0
1st superstar
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#2
Report 1 month ago
#2
AYE!!
0
Gundabad(good)
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#3
Report 1 month ago
#3
Aye. Seems reasonable enough but we must not get too reliant on it.
0
Possibly this
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#4
Report 1 month ago
#4
Aye, this finally recognises the duty we owe to the workers in this sector at such a difficult time to keep them on their feet so they can power the economy for years and decades to come!
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#5
Report 1 month ago
#5
Aye. I am open to the suggestions made in this motion, and agree that this sector is in need of aid.
0
Napp
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#6
Report 1 month ago
#6
No, simply because i don't see the point in putting this industry on the pedestal. If we're to extend the job retention scheme it shouldnt be simply for this industry and neglect the others. Especially when, arguably, this is far from the most important industry to be saved. the point being, if we're going to be passing motions on extending funding schemes they should be much broader than having to attend to individual sectors, imo.

As to the second point, i would say this seems perfectly proper.
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 1 month ago
#7
(Original post by Napp)
No, simply because i don't see the point in putting this industry on the pedestal. If we're to extend the job retention scheme it shouldnt be simply for this industry and neglect the others. Especially when, arguably, this is far from the most important industry to be saved. the point being, if we're going to be passing motions on extending funding schemes they should be much broader than having to attend to individual sectors, imo.

As to the second point, i would say this seems perfectly proper.
What other industries have not reopened yet?
0
JMR2020.
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 1 month ago
#8
No because I disagree with allowing venues to open at full capacity
0
Miss Maddie
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 1 month ago
#9
(Original post by JMR2020.)
No because I disagree with allowing venues to open at full capacity
You disagree with giving the government a choice? That's some special thinking there.
1
JMR2020.
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 1 month ago
#10
(Original post by Miss Maddie)
You disagree with giving the government a choice? That's some special thinking there.
Yes I don't think the option should exist for it.
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#11
Report 1 month ago
#11
(Original post by JMR2020.)
Yes I don't think the option should exist for it.
They you disagree with the GD and with your own governments previous actions then...
Governments are not required to follow the outcome of a motion - they are not even required to respond to it. This government has responded to motions, and it hasn't always responded to motions by following what the motion outlined. Yet you're against a motion because it gives the Government a choice it already has and will have regardless of what the motion says?
I can think of a number of occasions when your government contradicted the perceived "will of the house", most famously on the Cardiff Airport issue. So do you really think the government shouldn't have options that you've previously exercised?
1
JMR2020.
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#12
Report 1 month ago
#12
(Original post by 04MR17)
They you disagree with the GD and with your own governments previous actions then...
Governments are not required to follow the outcome of a motion - they are not even required to respond to it. This government has responded to motions, and it hasn't always responded to motions by following what the motion outlined. Yet you're against a motion because it gives the Government a choice it already has and will have regardless of what the motion says?
I can think of a number of occasions when your government contradicted the perceived "will of the house", most famously on the Cardiff Airport issue. So do you really think the government shouldn't have options that you've previously exercised?
Well a motion is a debate on a matter of principle not legislation. In which case my belief is that venues should not open at full capacity and would enable widespread spread of the virus. And I believe that the government should in no cases do this, hence why should I not oppose this motion?
0
04MR17
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#13
Report 1 month ago
#13
(Original post by JMR2020.)
Well a motion is a debate on a matter of principle not legislation. In which case my belief is that venues should not open at full capacity and would enable widespread spread of the virus. And I believe that the government should in no cases do this, hence why should I not oppose this motion?
A motion is a debate on a statement, the statement here is that the live events sector needs action to be taken due to Covid-19. Voting no would imply you don't want any action to be taken. It's entirely up to the government what action is taken as a result of this motion and any suggestions in the motion itself are only suggestions.
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report 1 month ago
#14
A 'no' vote has been removed for ROTL94 (not an MP).
0
CatusStarbright
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#15
Report 1 month ago
#15
Order, Order!

The ayes to the right: 29
The noes to the left: 6
Abstains:10

The ayes have it, the ayes have it. Unlock!
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (150)
14.45%
I'm not sure (45)
4.34%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (310)
29.87%
I have already dropped out (27)
2.6%
I'm not a current university student (506)
48.75%

Watched Threads

View All