Consultation Responses and Policy Briefings

Protect Briefing – Employment Rights Bill Second Reading

Following the launch of the government’s Employment Rights Bill this briefing sets out Protect’s proposals to strengthen the rights of whistleblowers.

Protect written evidence to the Infected Blood Inquiry – 13/10/23 

We were asked to submitted evidence to the independent public statutory inquiry into the use of infected blood. 

The inquiry is examining why men, women and children in the UK were given infected blood and/or infected blood products while being treated by the NHS. 

We have set out our proposals regarding the reform of the Public Interest Disclose Act, the need to strengthen accountability and oversight at Board level, having mechanisms to amplify the whistleblower’s voice, impose standards on NHS trusts or healthcare providers and ensure regulators properly enforce these to improve the culture and practice of speaking up in the healthcare sector. 

Read Protect’s briefing on the Back Bench Business Debate happening on the 22nd March 2023.  Read our full briefing here.

Read Protect’s briefing on the new Clause 7 to the Economic Crime & Corporate Transparency Bill 2023. Read our full briefing here

There is a clear need to reform the current whistleblowing framework, and there is much to support in the proposal to introduce an Office of the Whistleblower. However, we are concerned by the proposal at Clause 26, to repeal the current whistleblowing protection – the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA). This would remove significant employment law rights for whistleblowers.

Read our full briefing, here

A briefing on why whistleblowing should be part of the new Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill 2022. Read here

Protect is delighted that Kevan Jones MP and others have recently suggested an amendment to the new National Security Bill (NSB 2022) and Official Secrets Act (OSA 1989) to include a Public Interest Defence.

More detail is set out in our briefing here.

Protect has responded to the call for evidence from Margaret Beels, the Director of Labour Market Enforcement. We have argued that any consideration on how to improve compliance and enforcement must consider how to improve whistleblowing processes to ensure that workers are encouraged to speak up and raise their concerns.

You can read our full response here.

Protect is concerned about the new National Security Bill introduced by the Home Office in May 2022.

We are particularly concerned about a possible impact on the ability of whistleblowers to raise corruption issues if, in doing so, their concern exposes a trade secret. We are also concerned that the text of the Bill is too widely drawn without any kind of public interest defence for whistleblowers (despite previous recommendations from the Law Commission). More detail is set out in our briefing here.

Protect has responded to the Solicitor Regulation Authority’s consultation on health and wellbeing rule changes. The proposals by the SRA include a duty not to bully, harass or discriminate unfairly against colleagues, and for staff to challenge behaviour that does not meet this standard. We have proposed that this duty should also make it clear that negative treatment of whistleblowers or those who “challenge” conduct should not be permitted. We have also asked that the SRA put standards both internally – and on the firms that they regulate – to ensure that there are safe mechanisms in place for people to “challenge” such behaviour, i.e. raise concerns through whistleblowing.

You can find our response here.

Protect has responded to the Ministry of Justice’s emergency call for evidence on Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs). In our own response, we have focused on the experience and risk of whistleblowers facing SLAPPs. We are also a join signatory to the Anti-SLAPP Coalition’s response.

You can find our response here.

Response to the consultation, Human Rights Act Reform: A Modern Bill of Rights 

Protect has responded to the Ministry of Justice’s consultation with focus on questions relating to Article 10, Freedom of Expression. Protect wants to ensure that the government considers the rights of whistleblowers and those who speak out in the public interest when considering reform and strengthening of this fundamental right. Protect also contributed to the Employment Lawyers Association’s working party response.

Protect’s Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill 2022 Briefing

We have written a briefing outlining key whistleblowing issues connected to the new Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill, including standards on regulators and standards on employers when dealing with concerns raised by whistleblowers.

Protect’s proposed amendments to the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill 2022  

We have also proposed amendments to the Bill following the suggestions in our briefing around regulators, a Commissioner to Protect Whistleblowers, and an anti-SLAPP provision.

Protect’s Briefing on the amendments of the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill

On March 3, amendments were put down for the Secretary of State to establish a Commission for the Protection of Whistleblowers. Please see the above for our briefing on the amendment which was sent to Members of Parliament ahead of the debate on Monday.

UPDATED Protect’s Briefing on the amendments of the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill

On 7 March, we sent this briefing to some members of the House of Lords with an additional explanation on the SLAPP amendments.

Protect’s Response to the Inquiry: Mobilising Action on Climate Change and Environment: Behaviour Change

Protect responded to this call for evidence, highlighting the importance of whistleblowing in the environmental sector, the lack of awareness and reporting, and suggesting that whistleblowing should form part of any consideration as to how culture and behaviour can be changed in the sector.

Protect’s Public Interest Defence Briefing in the Official Secrets Act 1989

We produced a briefing laying out the arguments for why there needs to be a public interest defence added to the Official Secrets Act 1989, and the dangers of the proposed reforms from the Home Office that is danger of making whistleblowing seen legally as an act of espionage.

Read our blog on why NDAs need reform: Why NDAs need reform – Protect – Speak up stop harm (protect-advice.org.uk)

Our briefing on the matter can be found here: NDA Briefing

Protect submission to The Law Commission consultation on corporate criminal liability (26.08.21)

We argued that if corporate bodies were to have a defence to criminal liability then evidence of strong whistleblowing arrangements should form a part of that defence. We also argued that regulators should have more powers to impose civil penalties on employers who maltreat whistleblowers rather than pursuing criminal prosecutions.

Protect and WIN Letter to The Home Office (22.07.21)

Protect and the Whistleblowing International Network (WIN) responded to The Home Office’s consultation on “Legislation to counter state threats”.

We argued that the Official Secrets Act 1989 needs to be reformed to include a public interest defence for whistleblowers. We also argued in favour of a Statutory Commissioner to receive whistleblowing concerns, and highlighted the importance of keeping pace with international developments.

Protect Letter to The Law Commission (21.07.21)

We responded to The Law Commission’s consultation for its 14^th Programme of Law Reform.

We argued that The Law Commission should consider whistleblowing law as one of its next projects for review because UK whistleblowing law is nearly 25 years old and the UK is falling behind internationally. There are many groups of people unprotected by the current law and changes need to be made to improve access to justice.