I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to establish an independent Office of the Whistleblower to protect whistleblowers and whistleblowing; to make provision for the Office of the Whistleblower to set, monitor and enforce standards for the management of whistleblowing cases, to provide disclosure and advice services, to direct whistleblowing investigations and to order redress of detriment suffered by whistleblowers; and for connected purposes.
So it is quite a small Bill.
If I may, I shall start with a couple of thank yous. All too often, being a whistleblower is a thankless task. Whistleblowers risk so much: their personal standing, their reputations, and their homes. I think that this ten-minute rule motion, coming so soon after the statement that we heard from my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, highlights the importance of those who are willing to speak up and draw attention to wrongdoing when they see it. I should like—on behalf of the House, if it will indulge me—to thank those people who have the bravery to stand up, say that there is wrongdoing, and put themselves at risk.
I also want to pay a short tribute to my immediate predecessor in this place, Jo Gideon, who now serves as the chairperson of WhistleblowersUK. She did a lot in this House to progress the issue, and it is a testament to her that progress was made in the last Parliament. I hope that we can continue it in this place.
I am grateful to the Government for the work that they have been doing on improving current arrangements for whistleblowing. The duty of candour Bill, which will place on our public servants the requirement to speak out and tell the truth when an investigation is happening, is an important part of shining a light on some of the dark recesses of our public sector when things go wrong. I am also grateful to the Government for recognising that whistleblowing can be important for tackling sexual harassment, and for the work that they are doing on the Employment Rights Bill.
The whole purpose of whistleblowing is to try to prevent things from happening in the first place. All too often we end up in circumstances and situations in which something terrible happens, and somebody stands up and gives evidence about what has happened. As we have heard over many hours of debate in this place, it then costs an awful lot of money to redress the wrongdoing that has happened. In such circumstances, not having in place an effective and efficient whistleblowing system that is available to anybody who sees wrongdoing costs taxpayers a huge amount of money.
The current framework for whistleblowing in this country is very much looked at through the lens of employment law. Technically, someone is considered a whistleblower only if they are employed by, and have a contractual relationship with, the organisation about which they are making a disclosure. That means that the remedy and redress that is available to the whistleblower normally ends up in an employment tribunal, which looks at the occupational and work-related loss that the individual has suffered, and not necessarily at some of the social and reputational damage that they suffer as a result of being the person who stands up and speaks out. We all know that standing up and speaking out is so important, because it is instilled in new Members of Parliament when we arrive here. We are told that if we see wrongdoing, we have a duty to say something.
Anyone who travels on trains will hear the slogan, “See it. Say It. Sorted.” If people see wrongdoing in life, however, saying something about it is often a risk too far. They might make a disclosure about their workplace, and suddenly they will be put on gardening leave. They find themselves in a situation in which they are labelled as the troublemaker in the organisation. Then they end up down the employment tribunal route, and the issue does not necessarily get dealt with.
One aspect of my Bill that I hope the Government will consider taking forward—if not through this Bill, then perhaps by bringing forward other Bills—is the proposed office of the whistleblower, which was supported by my party in opposition and in amendments tabled to the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023. Such an office has been talked about in this House; the hon. Member for Torbay (Steve Darling), who is no longer in his place, said in a previous debate that it would have helped us to prevent some of the scandals that we have seen in this country. The proposed office of the whistleblower would provide a genuine levelling effect for people who stand up and say the right thing, and who then suddenly find themselves opposed by the legal and financial resources of huge companies that seek to discredit them, isolate them and put them in a position in which their reputation and home life struggle. With an office of the whistleblower, we could remove the David versus Goliath situation and genuinely ensure that speaking up and doing the right thing counts.
I would hope that the proposed office of the whistleblower would be a designated body to which people can report when they have made a disclosure. Currently, 88 different regulatory bodies can take a whistleblowing declaration. In fact, Members of Parliament are prescribed people: whistleblowers can make a declaration to us without necessarily incurring a penalty. Very few of us know that, and very few of us are able to progress a disclosure to the next stage. The proposed office of the whistleblower would be required to collate data on where whistleblowing declarations are being made from public bodies and other organisations. Crucially, that would tell us where there is a problem. I am sure that even today there will be employees in the NHS, the civil service, other public sector organisations and the private sector who make a disclosure to a manager, while yesterday somebody else made a disclosure to a different manager about the same problem. But no one is collating that data to say, “Actually, this is a problem in a particular sector; we should probably look at this and take some action now and prevent a genuine wrongdoing, malpractice, malfeasance or even death from occurring.”
Our current whistleblowing arrangements are far too reactive. They rely on somebody standing up and speaking out, and they rely on that person taking a risk after an event has happened. It becomes almost a situation of saying, “Here is the evidence to correct the wrongdoing that has occurred.” We need to change whistleblowing culture in our country so that when something is happening and we see it or somebody else sees it, they feel compelled and also supported to make that declaration. That is very important because quite often the people who are doing the wrongdoing in the first place—the people who are undertaking malpractice, malfeasance or corruption—do it because they think they can get away with it. They do it because they think nobody is watching. They do it because they think the risk is less than the reward they can personally derive from a cover-up, fraud or any form of non-criminal activity. By making it clear that we now empower individuals—citizens of the country—to stand up and make a declaration, and be protected and supported in doing so, those who want to do wrong will think again. That will prevent our having to spend millions of pounds on redress—money that we can put to better use in this country.
I hope that this short Bill, although it has a long title, will go some way to rebalancing power in this country by allowing those brave souls—who often take on the mighty giants—the opportunity and the support they need to do the right thing, knowing we have got their backs.
Question put and agreed to.
Ordered,
That Gareth Snell, Liam Byrne, Robin Swann, Richard Foord, Sarah Champion, Mr Jonathan Brash, Tonia Antoniazzi, Dr Allison Gardner, Mr Alex Barros-Curtis, Jim Shannon, Jodie Gosling, Will Stone and Anna Dixon present the Bill.
Gareth Snell accordingly presented the Bill.
Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 25 April 2025, and to be printed (Bill 152).