For more coverage on this, check out our main story: Unions criticise strikes bill as unworkable

Today's writers were Aoife Walsh, Thomas Mackintosh, Sam Hancock and Victoria Lindrea.

The editors were Chris Giles, Rob Corp and Emma Owen.

We're pausing our live coverage now, but before we go here's a quick recap of what's been announced.

• Business Secretary Grant Shapps has set out new laws requiring minimum levels of service for the public sector during strikes
• Under the proposals, some public sector workers would be required to work during a strike
• The legislation will affect public transport workers, the NHS, education, fire and rescue, border security, and nuclear decommissioning

• Shapps said the proposed legislation was similar to existing laws in other modern European economies and it was not designed to ban strikes

• Unions have threatened legal action if the bill is passed
• Labour said the plans will not work and announced they would repeal the bill if they get into government

Image source, PA Media

Some reaction to bring you now from Nicola Sturgeon as she vows to fight the UK government's minimum service level proposals "every step of the way".

The Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Bill would apply across the whole of the UK.

Scotland's First Minister says her party and government will oppose the "anti-trade union" legislation at both Westminster and Holyrood.

She adds: "I believe that while I don't want to see workers having to take strike action, the right to strike is a fundamental right in a democracy.

"And the way you resolve industrial disputes is by negotiations, not by legislating to take away workers' rights."

Trades Union Congress (TUC) general secretary Paul Nowak says the minimum service legislation proposed by Grant Shapps will risk further strikes.

"This legislation would mean that, when workers democratically vote to strike, they can be forced to work and sacked if they don't comply.

"That's undemocratic, unworkable, and almost certainly illegal," he said.

"Let's be clear, if passed, this Bill will prolong disputes and poison industrial relations - leading to more frequent strikes."

David Wallace Lockhart
BBC political correspondent

This bill has a long - and potentially tricky - parliamentary journey ahead of it. But it shows the direction of travel the government wants to go in.

Ministers want to use the law to ensure that staffing levels in certain parts of the public sector, such as health, “protect the public” even during strikes.

But this would mean certain strikes are less disruptive. Given that this is the point of industrial action, this may well dilute the impact certain employees can have during disputes.

This is all happening while there seems to be signs ministers and some unions are starting to make progress towards agreements to end current strikes (though this is far from guaranteed).

While there may be a “chink of light” (as one union put it at the weekend) in the current situation, the government may well want to avoid being in the same position at some point in the future, and this legislation could help with that.

Though obviously it will be fiercely opposed by the union movement.

While Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has had a slightly tetchy relationship with a number of union leaders during recent strikes (he told his frontbenchers to avoid picket lines) the party is sticking to its trade union roots on this issue, insisting they would repeal this legislation.

Image source, Reuters

The train drivers' trade union says the introduction of new legislation was an admission by the Tory government that it had "lost its argument with the people of Britain".

"Rishi Sunak, rather than doing the decent thing – the right thing – and negotiate with us, is trying to prevent thousands of workers from being able to withdraw their labour.

"That is what authoritarian governments in authoritarian states do," said Mick Whelan, Aslef's general secretary.

He added that the proposed minimum service levels were "unworkable"

"It is already being referred to as a Sacking the Staff Bill. It’s extraordinary that, when the rail industry already has a dramatic shortage of drivers, the government wants to sack people for engaging in industrial action."

David Wallace Lockhart
BBC political correspondent

The government’s argument is that even when strikes are taking place the public should still be able to rely on vital services. Such as an ambulance turning up and being able to catch a train.

But what we don’t know is what level of staffing the government believes is necessary to achieve this. Ministers say they’ll be consulting, but it’s really the key question when it comes to this legislation.

The government now wants to reserve the right to tell certain sectors what services they must provide even when they’re striking. And workers who refuse to play ball could ultimately lose their jobs.

Opposition parties were unimpressed, but Grant Shapps is even facing some criticism from his own MPs.

Conservative MP Stephen McPartland tweeted that it was “shameful to target individual workers and order them to walk past their mates on picket line or be sacked”.

The government should have a healthy enough majority to get this bill through, but don’t expect it to be a straightforward process.

After an hour or so we have now heard all we will from MPs in the Commons on this topic.

Grant Shapps has taken dozens of questions about the government's proposal to limit strike action.

Stay with us as we recap what has been said and bring you analysis.

Labour MP Cat Smith says she recalls clapping key workers during the pandemic and claims the government is putting workers jobs at risk rather than resolving the strikes.

Smith suggests Shapps should put more effort in talking to trade unions.

He replies that the government has not ignored the independent pay review body and is following the science and evidence.

Shapps says it is wrong to frighten people that their jobs could be at risk.

Labour MP Mike Amesbury says the proposed legislation is "very un-British" and an attack on the democratic right to withdraw one's labour.

He asks how many workers will be sacked for standing up for their right to withdraw their labour.

Shapps responds: "The answer to the question is none."

He says the government is proposing a minimum safety level, not a no strike deal.

SNP MP Gavin Newlands says he has joined picket lines in Scotland and mentions that he hasn't had to be photoshopped out of the picture - another nod to Grant Shapps' tweet.

He says that Scottish workers would be better off as an independent country.

Shapps laughs off the photoshop reference, saying that he would never knowingly edit out his former boss, and says that everyone in the UK will benefit under the new plans.

Another Labour MP, Andrew Gwynne, says the reality behind this issue is that the government has refused to negotiate fairly with workers.

He advises Shapps to spend less time on the image editing software Photoshop - referring to backlash around a tweet he posted earlier - and more time "sitting down and negotiating" with unions.

Shapps refuses to be drawn on the photo-editing snipe, and instead repeats concerns around constituents suffering due to public sector workers striking.

Labour MP Mary Kelly Foy says the new legislation would impose servitude on workers and undermine their legitimate dispute.

She asks why a new law is needed to help the government drive down the wages of key workers that he clapped during the pandemic.

In response, Shapps says the average Network Rail worker earns an average of £46,000 of servitude and a train driver is on an average of £62,000 of servitude.

He says the idea that introducing minimum service levels would enforce servitude is nonsense.

The DUP's Carla Lockhart says Shapps' tributes to NHS workers, as laid out in an earlier post, are meaningless unless the government commits to "paying our healthcare workers properly".

Shapps says the pay offer on the table, which came from independent pay review bodies, was not created by the government.

If people want to ignore these recommendations - and these bodies - they have to be able to explain what the alternative is, he tells Lockhart, and how it'll be "fair" for all taxpayers.

Sam Tarry MP says Britain is one of the most restricted and anti-worker countries in the world.

The Labour MP accuses the government of failing talks and says it could end strikes in multiple sectors.

Shapps points out that Tarry stood on a picket line himself and has helped to extend strikes.

DUP MP Jim Shannon says strikes within the NHS aren't just about money but also safety in hospital wards.

Shapps says the government is trying to relieve the pressure post-Covid, but says he recognises the pressure on hospitals.

He hits out again at the ambulance workes' strike, and says the unions need to indicate where the safety level will be on a nationwide basis.

Labour's Zarah Sultana is up next, listing the various industries where workers' salaries have gone down, including teaching and firefighting.

She says the new legislation would be unfair for those people - and that the issue is not the workers at all but the government.

Shapps responds, asking whether Sultana and her benches would support the 19% pay rise that nurses are asking for.

If they would, he says, they're underlining why they "aren't ready to run this country".

This has been a contentious issue during the strikes, with various Labour MPs being asked whether they'd pay the demands being made. They've sometimes failed to suggest an alternative, saying instead that they'd be at the negotiating table with union leaders.