Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Jones; his long and extensive memories of the issues here really highlighted the depth and length of the problem that is the background to this statutory instrument. I thank the Minister for her introduction, which was very clear. I also commend the impact assessment—my plaudits go to the people who prepared it—because it is far better than those that we see for many of these SIs. It sets out a picture of an industry, the construction industry, which is in deep trouble when we need it to be tackling the incredibly poor quality of housing stock in particular and building stock more generally, for which the building in which we are standing might be taken as a symbol. We have here an SI whose proposals, to quote the impact assessment, “include little change” for 2026 compared with 2025. The problems are much broader; an industry training levy can tackle only so much. I have some questions for the Minister; I will understand if she wants to write to me rather than respond from the Dispatch Box. Paragraph 13 of the impact assessment highlights the heavy reliance on subcontracting and self-employment. This is associated with very poor levels of mental health in the construction sector. The figures on suicide and attempted suicide among employees in the sector, who are often on very low wages and in very insecure employment, are deeply concerning. That is a huge human problem, but it is also a huge problem for the workforce. As the impact assessment says: “The industry is very cyclical, with drops in output and employment when there is an economic downturn”. I recall being at a National Insulation Association conference, in 2011, I believe, when it basically said that the industry was closing down because government funding for it had stopped, and that all its most skilled people were going off to do something else and probably would not come back when there was an uplift.