Kate Dearden

I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade) on securing the debate, and I thank her for the constructive and determined way in which she has championed this issue in the House and through her presentation Bill. I also recognise her close work with her constituent Mike Taylor, whom she mentioned this evening, and whose business is an accredited outstanding provider of barbering apprenticeships. I pay tribute to him, and to the hairdressers and barbers whose experiences the hon. Member has shared with the House this evening. I was brought up around this industry. My mum was a hairdresser—I am very lucky that I can still persuade her to do my hair today—so I recognise how important it is to be a voice in Parliament for hair and beauty, which is an absolute powerhouse of an industry. I am proud to be the Minister responsible for personal care. Hair and beauty does not just make a significant £28 billion contribution to the economy and provide almost 600,000 jobs; it is also about the salon on the high street that brings people into town, as the hon. Member said. It supports our local communities, helping them to thrive. For many women, it often starts as a passion, a set of professional skills and the ambition to build something of their own, and that can grow into a successful business, creating employment and opportunities for others. With more than 85% of businesses in our sector owned by women, hair and beauty is a powerful example of female entrepreneurship, independence and resilience. Behind every salon is a story of hard work, skill, creativity and determination. I recognise the significance of our industry, which is made up mainly of women, and I thank them for all the support that they give to women across the country. The hon. Member mentioned that, when we get our hair done, they are often our therapists, and we walk out feeling amazing. Let me turn to where we agree. The harms that the hon. Member described are real. Customers should feel safe and protected in a salon chair, and good employers should not be undercut by those who cheat and do not play by the same rules. Young people need a route into the profession, and criminals should not be hiding behind barber shopfronts on our high streets. The question before the House is not whether those problems matter—of course they do—but whether a mandatory register is the right way to fix them. I will take a number of her arguments in turn, explain where I would like to hear more evidence about what would work instead, and explain what we are prioritising. It is first worth being clear about what a register is. As the hon. Member mentioned, the Hairdressers (Registration) Act 1964 already provides for a register of qualified hairdressers and barbers. Making it mandatory would record that an individual holds a qualification. Although that would improve visibility, it would not inspect a salon, check who owns a business or where its money comes from, or decide whether somebody is genuinely self-employed. It would not create a single new apprenticeship place. That matters, because each of the harms that she and many other hon. Members have discussed comes from something other than a missing qualification. On consumer safety, I want to highlight two examples: ringworm and chemical burns, because these are distressing and I do not want to dismiss them for a moment. Ringworm comes from poor hygiene and infection control. A qualified stylist working with unclean equipment poses the same risk as an unqualified one. Chemical burns come from the unsafe use of hazardous products. Every salon—whoever works in it—is already legally required to control these risks under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 and the associated regulations, such as the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 and the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002. Local authorities already have the powers to enforce health and safety legislation and are responsible for managing hygiene standards in businesses. Where there is evidence that risks are not being properly managed, local authorities can intervene and take appropriate enforcement action to ensure that employers and customers are protected. A register would not send anyone through the door to check, but enforcement does, and where the evidence has shown serious risks of harm, the Government have acted. Last month we launched a consultation proposing that high-risk cosmetic procedures should be carried out only by qualified, regulated healthcare professionals, with providers registered with the Care Quality Commission and criminal penalties for breaches. We have also committed to a licensing scheme for lower-risk cosmetic procedures and have acted because there was strong evidence showing a scale of harm. So far we have not seen comparable evidence for hairdressing, but if the hon. Member has cases—she has raised some tonight—I want my officials to see them. The hon. Member is right that bogus self-employment, too, is unacceptable. Self-employment, as she mentioned, is a legitimate and long-standing part of the sector, and many workers value that flexibility in their way of working. But no employer should deny the basic rights of people by calling them self-employed when they are not. Here, too, it is not clear how a register might help. A fully qualified registered barber could still be falsely self-employed. What will make a difference is fixing the employment status framework itself. We have published a consultation on targeted reforms, including a proposal of worker status and stronger enforcement. These proposals are designed with workers like those in hairdressing in mind. Alongside that, the important work of the Fair Work Agency now brings together employment rights enforcement into one place with a dedicated hidden economy team. I know that Fair Work Agency officials have met the sector. His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs will investigate where people have been misclassified for tax purposes and take action to recover the tax and national insurance owed. I am of course happy to keep the hon. Member updated on the employment status consultation and to discuss it further with her. The hon. Member spoke powerfully about apprenticeships. I will not pretend that the recent figures that she alluded to and that decline we have seen in apprenticeship starts is comforting—it is not. As she mentioned, hairdressing businesses play such an important role in employment and training opportunities, particularly for young people. That is why it is important to strengthen the sector’s skills pipeline for those opportunities for social mobility and career progression. The challenge that employers describe is the cost and capacity to take on and train a young person. It is not clear how a register that requires qualifications may help, and we are mindful of the costs for small businesses that do the training, which she referred to.