Parliamentary debates on UK legislation

"I pay tribute to the right hon. Member for Braintree (Sir James Cleverly) for securing this urgent question. Local government reform is complex, involving more than 200 councils that deliver services to millions of residents right across the country. My hon. Friend the Minister is very capable, but local government is raising real concerns. Is she aware of the comments of the new chair of the Local Government Association, Councillor Eamonn O’Brien, who said that the LGA had “not previously taken a position on LGR”, but that it is “hearing from…councils…about real delivery concerns”? We have looked at this issue on the Select Committee, and have raised concerns about standards in the housing sector, ability to deliver measures, such as those rightly in the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, and enfo"

— Florence Eshalomi (Vauxhall and Camberwell Green) (Lab/Co-op) Hansard

"I will give two examples that have a bearing on the hon. Gentleman’s point momentarily. The Liberal Democrats have supported elements of the Government’s reforms. We supported the housing measures in the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, and we support the principle of strategic planning. We also have no objection to a standard scheme of delegation or an upper limit on the size of planning committees. However, we do not accept that decisions must—the word “must” is used several times in the draft regulations—be taken away from elected councillors such that councils will approve decisions in cases where every single councillor disagrees, and the council’s name will still be on that decision. How can that be just? How can that be right? The delivery of new homes is important. In particular, our targ"

— Gideon Amos Hansard

"I will give way in a second, but let me briefly mention resources, which are really important. It is vital that councils have the capacity to take action where needed. That is why we have provided £18.2 million in 2025-26 and £41.1 million for 2026-27 to support the new enforcement responsibilities that local authorities have taken on under the Renters’ Rights Act 2025. We plan to establish a more sustainable funding system for enforcement in the private rented sector over the longer term based on future database revenue fees, but, again, I want to understand the challenges that particular local authorities are facing in that respect."

— Matthew Pennycook Hansard

"I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Private Landlord Redress Schemes (Approval and Designation) Regulations 2026. It is an absolute pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mrs Barker—it is my first time doing so, which makes it all the more special. In our manifesto, we promised to overhaul the regulation of an insecure and unjust private rented sector. Our transformative Renters’ Rights Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 27 October last year, delivered on that commitment. In the implementation road map, published on 13 November 2025, the Government set out our intention to switch on the provisions of the Act in three distinct phases. As the first phase, on 1 May 2026, we commenced the new tenancy regime. As a result, section 21 no-fault evictions were finally"

— The Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook) Hansard

"Rural housing availability is in crisis, and all the tenants of an estate near Haltwhistle in my constituency, many of whom are elderly tenants in their 70s and 80s, received section 21 notices a week before the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 came into effect. In a rural community like that, there simply is not similar housing nearby. It is the dismantling of a rural community. Will the Minister therefore meet me to discuss the support he can offer for constituents and the further steps we can take to stop rural communities being victimised by these practices?"

— Joe Morris (Hexham) (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, today has been “Frank Sinatra day”—regrets, there have been a few—and we are thankful to the noble Lord, Lord Sharpe, for this last one; it is the last but by no means least. It seemed a short time ago that we were discussing the issues raised by this order in the Employment Rights Act 2025, but when I look at the calendar, I see that it was nearly a year ago—I guess it still looms large in my life. To an extent, this debate is something of a rerun of what we discussed then. In that spirit, I reiterate that the Liberal Democrats believe that free association is a fundamental right, and that of course includes the workplace. Employees should be free to join, or not to join, a trade union, and they should not face penalties either way. To participate in a union and to associate fre"

— Lord Fox (LD) Hansard

"My Lords, I shall also speak to the accompanying Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots. I also note the regret amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Sharpe of Epsom, and I am glad of the opportunity to debate these important reforms. I will address the concerns raised by the noble Lord during my remarks. This statutory instrument and the accompanying code of practice were laid before Parliament on 22 June 2026. This instrument has a clear and straightforward purpose. It modernises the statutory framework governing certain trade union ballots by allowing secure electronic voting and workplace ballots, while preserving the integrity, secrecy and independence that are fundamental to every statutory union ballot. Alongside these reforms, it m"

— The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business and Trade (Lord Leong) (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, I am very grateful for the support across the House, especially from the noble Lords, Lord Balfe and Lord Fox, for the Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 and the Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots. Today’s scrutiny and debate have been constructive and light-hearted, at some points. Noble Lords have raised interesting points on dispute resolution, workplace ballots and the next phases of delivery for the measure. They have also raised points on the 50% threshold, intimidation and dispute resolution, as I mentioned earlier. I will address these points briefly. First, I will respond to the point raised by my noble friend Lady Jones of Whitchurch on dispute res"

— Lord Leong (Lab) Hansard

"Indeed. They wanted to work with resident doctors to talk through a way to make progress without resorting to strike action, because that is a sign of failure in any system. On new clause 81, we are committed to reforming trade union legislation to bring it into the 21st century. We want to create an industrial relations framework that is fit for a modern economy, and workplaces that work for everyone. That is why the Employment Rights Act 2025 repealed the Strikes (Minimum Service Level) Act 2023. The previous legislation created a hostile environment, which was not conducive to good partnership working with trade unions or to settling disputes. On new clause 82, although strikes are hugely disruptive, a ban on a doctor’s right to strike is not the answer."

— Karin Smyth Hansard

"My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend Lady Evans for securing this debate and it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Frost. The Government’s stewardship of the economy over the past two years has been little short of catastrophic for our labour market. When the Government took office two years ago, they inherited a labour market that had recovered from the pandemic, although it still bore some of its scars, and what did they do? As my noble friend Lady Evans so powerfully explained, they immediately taxed employers for the act of hiring. Unsurprisingly, as we have heard, unemployment has risen rapidly ever since and now stands at just under 2 million, with over 1 million young people unemployed. If business had not had enough already, the Government then introduced their busi"

— Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con) Hansard

"I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. In their final months in office, the last Labour Government introduced the Equality Act 2010. That consolidated several pieces of anti-discrimination legislation, which was welcome, but it also introduced a new public sector equality duty, requiring public authorities to have “due regard” to preventing unlawful discrimination and fostering equality of opportunity between groups. The public sector equality duty also requires authorities “to…encourage persons who share a relevant protected characteristic to participate in public life or in any other activity in which participation by such persons is disproportionately low.” Unfortunately, that has become a vehicle for social engineering. It was designed, I believe, to improve equality of "

— Dr Johnson Hansard

"I am sure we are all aware of the importance of the role played by civil servants across the whole country. People often devote their whole working lives to these roles, so the least they deserve is to get the pensions they have paid for on time, and for their loved ones to receive their entitlements following bereavement. Sadly, the disastrous performance of Capita saw the backlog rocket to 120,000 in the first four weeks of it commencing work on the contract. I hope the Government manage to get the scheme sorted out as quickly as possible, and suspend payment and all future contract awards to Capita pending a full review. The decision to award Synergy the contract for payroll services across four Government Departments flies in the face of our Government’s commitment to delivering the bi"

— Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab) Hansard

"With new clause 83, I think the hon. Member for Sleaford and North Hykeham would like to exempt organisations that receive public funding to provide health and social care services from the public sector equality duty. I do not agree with the intent of this measure. The duty under the Equality Act 2010 was designed to ensure that public authorities “have due regard to the need to…eliminate discrimination…advance equality of opportunity” and “foster good relations” in the exercise of their functions. That includes when designing and delivering services. It is not an unnecessary addition but part of good service design and delivery. The duty is not there to dictate a particular outcome or set of priorities for the decision maker; it is there to help decision makers understand and take accoun"

— Karin Smyth Hansard

"It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Leigh and Atherton (Jo Platt) for securing this important debate, which I have thoroughly enjoyed listening to. In all the stories shared, I recognise how powerful and rich the debate is. I thank her for the work that she has done in Parliament. This is one of those topics that leads us to wonder why we have not had the conversation before. This must be its time as it has captured the imagination of Parliament so effectively and powerfully. It is already achieving the goals that my hon. Friend wants: that important culture change, a shift in attitudes and an understanding that where accentism might be holding back social mobility, it is our responsibility to do all that we can to tackle it. I p"

— The Minister for Equalities (Seema Malhotra) Hansard

"My Lords, I start by drawing the House’s attention to my registered interests. I am chair of the Accessible Transport Policy Commission and a board member of Active Travel England. The Disability Discrimination Act was passed in 1995. It was the bare minimum of what it was possible to get through Parliament at the time. I sat on the National Disability Council, which oversaw the implementation of the DDA. That said that all trains would be step-free by 1 Jan 2020. In 2020 we were told it would be 100 years before I could get on the majority of trains in the UK without the permission or support of a member of staff. I need to live only another 94 years. I look forward to working with the Minister, who has extensive knowledge in this space, but all Governments for the past 30 years have allo"

— Baroness Grey-Thompson (CB) Hansard

"I thank my hon. Friend for that contribution. He will know that colleagues in DSIT are working carefully on the Online Safety Act 2023 and its further implementation, learning lessons from how it is being applied and thinking carefully about what might need to be done. It is clear that we need a much stronger and better policed boundary between what is acceptable in a democracy and behaviour that is challenging the very foundations of our democracy. I have undertaken to have that discussion with colleagues across government, and I will make sure that the House is updated on the programme of work that the Government intend to take forward. We must make sure that all our arrangements are as robust as possible, and that it is we, the people of this country, who decide the inheritance that we "

— Shabana Mahmood Hansard

"That was, of course, an awful feature of what we saw. One of the things I learned in my discussions was that those from the far right had taken a list of houses in multiple occupation in Belfast—a list that, in the interests of openness, was properly available on the Belfast city council website; the council has now taken it down—and used it to try to target houses during the racist violence. There is a clear obligation on social media companies, set out in the Online Safety Act 2023, and there is an obligation on Ofcom to enforce that Act, because there is no doubt that part of the violence was fuelled by that kind of online hatred."

— Hilary Benn Hansard

"I totally agree that Scotland should join, because we should work together against fraudsters, not in isolation or silos. Short of catching the fraudsters themselves, my constituents who were defrauded provided every scrap of evidence that they or their businesses could, but they were all told by Action Fraud that there was no line of inquiry. I welcome the strong start on international co-operation and the introduction of an online crime centre, a new abuse taskforce and more data-driven policing. If properly supported, that work could help us to take a proactive approach to addressing the types of fraud that my constituents were victims of. Will the Minister look into whether the cases that Action Fraud failed to follow up can be reopened with those new systems in place? Lots of my const"

— Adam Dance Hansard

"My Lords, I should make it clear at the outset that I am pro-lobbying—how could I not be, given how much I have done in my time? It has been particularly helpful in the Lords. We do not have constituents to inform us of what needs doing, or not doing, by a Government, so it is good that those with a particular interest or knowledge make their way to Westminster, bringing their lived experience and the legitimate needs of their sector, company or beneficiaries to us and into the public forum—into our actual or metaphorical Peers’ Lobby. We have seen laws be changed for the better by effective lobbying. The NSPCC and children’s charities helped achieve the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. The British Lung Foundation’s work on banning smoking in cars carrying children led to the Smoke-free (Private V"

— Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab) Hansard

"Keeping people safe online at moments of real danger is a top priority for this Government. That is why we have asked Ofcom to expedite its work on updates to its codes of practice under the Online Safety Act 2023. All services face strict duties to deal with illegal content. Of course, it is right that platforms with a greater risk of viral content spreading must do even more to prepare for and manage periods of heightened risk."

— The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Kanishka Narayan) Hansard

"My Lords, I am grateful to noble Lords for the amendments on data, digital systems and technology within the social housing framework. I thank the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, and the noble Baronesses, Lady Coffey and Lady O’Neill, for contributing. Amendments 48, 49, 59, 60, 97 to 99, 114, 117 and 117B raise important questions about transparency, security and the effective use of data in delivering housing services. I will take each amendment in turn, beginning with Amendments 48 and 49 tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Holmes. Amendment 48 sets out the details that the noble Lord would like to be included in a ledger prepared by housing providers. It would require the Secretary of State to publish annually an analysis of disposal data, cross-referenced with housing need data, that identifies a"

— Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab) Hansard

"With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government new clauses 49 and 50 . New clause 1— Passengers’ Charter — “(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, lay before Parliament a Passengers’ Charter. (2) A Passengers’ Charter must include— (a) a guarantee about value for money, quality of service, and provision of adequate seating for any single part of a journey taken by rail for a duration greater than thirty minutes; (b) targets for reliability of services; (c) a timetable for implementing improvements to passenger accommodation on train services, including in relation to— (i) seat design, (ii) availability of high-speed WiFi and reliable cellular network service, (iii) provision of power outlets, (iv) storage f"

— Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani) Hansard

"My hon. Friend speaks with real authority on these matters. He will know that the theft of personal information is already criminalised in legislation, including the Fraud Act 2006, the Computer Misuse Act 1990 and the Data Protection Act 2018. To ensure that those laws remain effective, we commissioned an independent review of disclosures and fraud offences. The review has submitted its final report to the Government and will be published shortly. We will consider its findings carefully and what further action may be needed to strengthen our response to identity fraud. I am sure that the noble Lord Hanson will happily meet my hon. Friend."

— Dan Jarvis Hansard

"It was an official-led process. Let me just make that clear, because the right hon. Gentleman points towards a pretty important issue. We had the Humble Address and its wording—hon. Members can read that wording—with the quite extensive list drafted by the shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, the hon. Member for Brentwood and Ongar (Alex Burghart). At the end, it said: “except papers prejudicial to UK national security or international relations which shall instead be referred to the Intelligence and Security Committee”. What the Government have done, and indeed were entitled to do so, is take into account the precedents set by previous responses to Humble Addresses—under the Government whom the right hon. Gentleman supported, indeed. The Prime Minister has written to the Chair of "

— Nick Thomas-Symonds Hansard

"My Lords, I welcome the opportunity to respond to the Statement on the draft Equality Act 2010 code of practice. The publication of the draft code is welcome, and I was pleased to see greater protections for breast-feeding women, and greater clarity for people with disabilities. Those are important improvements. The Conservative Party has always been clear on this issue: vulnerable women and girls must be protected. We welcome the judgment of the Supreme Court, and we will always stand up for single-sex spaces to be protected in line with the law. That is the right approach; no matter what pressure they may be under from their friends in the unions and the Liberal Democrats, the Government must do the right thing and protect women and girls. However, public bodies, employers, schools, serv"

— Baroness Stedman-Scott (Con) Hansard

"My Lords, I am grateful to all noble Lords who have taken part in this debate, including the noble Lord, Lord Best, the noble Baronesses, Lady Warwick, Lady Neate, Lady Lister, Lady Teather and Lady O’Neill. I will be moving government Amendments 30 to 75; noble Lords will be pleased to know that I will move them en bloc and not one at a time. This Bill introduces important changes to give greater security and stability to social tenants who are victims of domestic abuse while giving landlords stronger powers to take action against perpetrators. While these protections have been warmly welcomed, we have listened closely to the legitimate concerns raised that the Bill’s protections, which focused on abuse involving a resident partner or that partner’s resident family member, are too narrow."

— Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, I should make it clear at the outset that I am pro-lobbying—how could I not be, given how much I have done in my time? It has been particularly helpful in the Lords. We do not have constituents to inform us of what needs doing, or not doing, by a Government, so it is good that those with a particular interest or knowledge make their way to Westminster, bringing their lived experience and the legitimate needs of their sector, company or beneficiaries to us and into the public forum—into our actual or metaphorical Peers’ Lobby. We have seen laws be changed for the better by effective lobbying. The NSPCC and children’s charities helped achieve the Domestic Abuse Act 2021. The British Lung Foundation’s work on banning smoking in cars carrying children led to the Smoke-free (Private V"

— Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab) Hansard

"Thank you for your patience, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is the most incredible privilege to be here in this Chamber to hear how my hon. Friend triumphed against the most horrendous abuse and to see her surrounded by her colleagues in the most supportive way possible. That feels like a real privilege, and I am very grateful to have been here for that moment. My hon. Friend championed the importance of a whole system approach to domestic abuse and violence against women and girls more broadly. I also know how hard it is to come forward and share experiences of abuse. I am proud to use my platform to shine a light on the challenges many victims and survivors face, and I know that so many will have been listening to my hon. Friend’s account this evening and will take strength from it. I want to "

— Natalie Fleet Hansard

"It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Burton and Uttoxeter (Jacob Collier) on opening this debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee and thank him for the thoughtful way he set out the issues raised in the petition. I also thank all right hon. and hon. Members for their contributions on establishing a public register for animal abusers and the automatic ownership ban. The petition has attracted significant public support, with more than 235,000 signatures, clearly demonstrating how strongly people across the country feel about protecting animals. I commend the tireless campaigning of Bea and her supporters. As a dog lover—and the owner of 11-year-old labradoodle Albert Attlee, who brings real joy to my family and me—I sh"

— The Minister of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Stephen Morgan) Hansard

"I thank my hon. Friend for her question and her conversations with me on this important topic. Let me be clear about what the Bill does. The legislation is symmetrical in its approach to abusive conversion practices that attempt to change somebody from one gender identity to another or from one sexual orientation to another. There are three parts to the criminal threshold as set out in the Bill: first, there must be an intent to change somebody; secondly, that must be through an abusive practice in line with other legislation, including the Domestic Abuse Act 2021; and thirdly, that practice must have caused significant harm. Those are the tests that will be used by the courts when determining whether prosecutions should be brought."

— Olivia Bailey Hansard

"With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government new clauses 49 and 50 . New clause 1— Passengers’ Charter — “(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, lay before Parliament a Passengers’ Charter. (2) A Passengers’ Charter must include— (a) a guarantee about value for money, quality of service, and provision of adequate seating for any single part of a journey taken by rail for a duration greater than thirty minutes; (b) targets for reliability of services; (c) a timetable for implementing improvements to passenger accommodation on train services, including in relation to— (i) seat design, (ii) availability of high-speed WiFi and reliable cellular network service, (iii) provision of power outlets, (iv) storage f"

— Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani) Hansard

"These clauses are in part 3 of the general provisions of the Bill. They provide the position on the commencement of measures in the Bill, the powers to make consequential, transitional and other provisions in connection with the coming into force of the provisions of the Bill, and the Bill’s territorial extent and short title. Clause 21 is a technical clause that will allow the Secretary of State to make any further consequential amendments or legislative changes where required to implement the provisions in the Bill. Clause 22 creates a power to allow the Lord Chancellor to make “transitional or saving provisions” by regulation “in connection with the coming into force of any provision of this Act.” Clause 23 will allow the Secretary of State to, by regulation, amend the Sentencing Act 20"

— Sarah Sackman Hansard

"I will not; I am going to make some progress. As Sir Brian’s report clearly outlines, “this is a principled reform based on the need for cases to be resolved in a more timely manner, with a forum well suited to the demands of the case.” He suggests that allowing a judge to hear these cases alone—in tightly defined circumstances, of course—can cut hearing time by at least 20%. As we have said already, we heard from various witnesses about how that time saving would be achieved. That is a gain for the system and for capacity in the Crown court that can be used to progress other sorts of cases. That is not an abstract assumption. There is not an absence of evidence here: we have heard from those with judicial experience, as well as from international comparators such as New South Wales, where"

— Sarah Sackman Hansard

"My Lords, first, I thank my noble friend Lord Banner for tabling these amendments, which, as we have heard, raise questions around how the proceeds of crime may be used to benefit victims. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady D’Souza, for stepping into the breach today to speak to these amendments in my noble friend’s absence. My noble friend Lord Banner has tenaciously pursued this matter for many months. The intention behind his amendments is clear: to ensure that, where criminal assets are confiscated, the courts have flexibility to direct those funds towards compensation for victims or towards wider public interest purposes linked to the harm caused. In Committee, I spoke sympathetically on these amendments. I shall not seek to repeat the points I made then but other noble Lords explored h"

— Lord Cameron of Lochiel (Con) Hansard

"My Lords, we support in principle Amendments 387C and 387D, the first of which was moved by the noble Baroness, Lady D’Souza, on behalf of the noble Lord, Lord Banner. These amendments address a moral and legal imperative, ensuring that assets confiscated from those who violate our laws, particularly our sanctions regime, are used to provide redress to the victims of those very same violations. My own amendment in Committee focused on a ministerial power to create a fund via regulations but Amendments 387C and 387D would place this power where I believe it properly belongs: with the judiciary. By amending the Sentencing Act 2020 and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, these amendments would grant the Crown Court the discretion to award compensation for public interest or social purposes. This "

— Lord Clement-Jones (LD) Hansard

"I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require persons discharging functions on behalf of certain other persons to assess the mental capacity of those persons in specified circumstances; and for connected purposes. At issue is the devastating misuse of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which has resulted in hundreds of preventable deaths. King’s College London found there were 160 of those deaths in 2023 alone. The Bill is in honour of Christopher Laskaris, whose mum Fiona is here. Christopher was not unlike many autistic children; he was a sensitive and intelligent boy, who once asked his mum to stop on the way to school to rescue a lamb stuck in a fence. I first met Fiona when I was eight. I had stayed in my bedroom and ignored her, perhaps because I was angry that she was "

— Chris Coghlan (Dorking and Horley) (LD) Hansard

"My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Holmes of Richmond, the noble Baronesses, Lady Tyler of Enfield and Lady Kramer, of Richmond Park, and other Peers for drawing attention to the important issue of financial inclusion. As someone who grew up in poverty, it is not an abstract concept to me and the community I come from. The noble Baroness, Lady Tyler of Enfield, asked if I would meet her to discuss this agenda further. I would of course be happy to meet her and any other noble Lords who would like to discuss the topic. I will write to her ahead of that meeting on the FCA’s consumer duty and what it means for financial inclusion, but I assure noble Lords that the Government are not relying on the FCA’s consumer duty as a catch-all solution. The Government agree that people shoul"

— Lord Stockwood (Lab) Hansard

"Last week the Supreme Court overturned the previous Cheshire West judgment on the Mental Capacity Act 2005, throwing the sector that cares for people with learning disabilities and/or autism into what it has called “chaos”. There is significant concern that, without further clarification as to whether someone who does not have mental capacity can consent to deprivation of liberty, vulnerable people will be put at significant risk. Will the Secretary of State listen to calls for—"

— Jen Craft (Thurrock) (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, I would like to seek some clarification from my noble friend the Minister about this matter, because the Mental Capacity Act 2005 presumes adult capacity and the Care Act 2014 defines safeguarding thresholds, which my noble friend has outlined in some detail already. Can my noble friend the Minister confirm that adults aged 18 to 25 referred to gender identity clinics are treated as autonomous patients without additional safeguarding measures beyond those which she has already outlined and apply to any competent adult?"

— Baroness Thornton (Lab) Hansard

"My constituent Michael is autistic and actively psychotic, and he has a confirmed lack of capacity. His parents have power of attorney. His chronic medical problems include cysts deep in his chest that could burst at any time, bowel disease, myopathy and sleep apnoea. His family contacts me with increasing distress as Michael has not washed or changed his clothes in eight months, refuses food, makes direct threats of violence to his mother, forbids his parents from using the phone, and compels his father to drive him around town after midnight. A multidisciplinary team decided on 3 March that a court of protection application was needed, but no agency accepts responsibility for filing. Will the Leader of the House ask the Health Secretary to ensure that his proposed reforms to the Mental C"

— Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD) Hansard

"My Lords, it is with a profound sense of sadness, shared across the House, that I pay tribute today to one of the truly monumental figures of our nation’s legal and parliamentary heritage. The news of the passing of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, shortly before his 100th birthday, is deeply felt by us all. James Mackay was a man of towering intellect, yet he was defined equally by his quiet humility, his deep faith, an unwavering commitment to public service and great generosity of spirit. Born the son of a railway signalman in Edinburgh, his journey to the highest legal offices of state is a testament to his extraordinary talent, rising to become dean of the Faculty of Advocates before serving with distinction as Lord Advocate. His deep grounding in Scottish law bro"

— The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Smith of Basildon) (Lab) Hansard

"We are resolute and committed to repealing the presumption of parental involvement in the Children Act 1989. The campaigning efforts of the likes of Claire Throssell have been little short of heroic, and we will redouble our efforts to ensure that the repeal of that presumption comes about through the Courts and Tribunals Bill."

— Sarah Sackman Hansard

"With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 2— Dual nationals serving in foreign armed forces: war crimes risk— “(1) This section applies to a person (‘the individual’) who is— (a) a British national or a person ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom, and (b) a member of the armed forces of a foreign state. (2) Where the Secretary of State has reasonable grounds to believe that the individual has participated in, ordered, or failed to prevent conduct that constitutes a war crime within the meaning of Article 8 of the Rome Statute, the Secretary of State may— (a) refer the matter to the Attorney General for consideration of proceedings under the International Criminal Court Act 2001, (b) direct that the individual’s British travel document be suspended pending in"

— Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins) Hansard

"I welcome this morning’s announcement. The platforms are not now off the hook: the Online Safety Act 2023 operates until the age of 18, which is the age to which the Children Act 1989 requires protection to be in place. On the announcement, what is the net effect of exempting messaging services but blocking communication from strangers, if a messaging service allows anybody who knows a person’s phone number to add them to a large messaging group?"

— Damian Hinds (East Hampshire) (Con) Hansard

"I have to admit that I am not sure whether the hon. Lady is for or against the ban. [ Interruption. ] She is a Lib Dem, say Members on the Conservative Benches. She asked about the model. In my statement, I said that it is the Australian model. We have learned the lessons, which is why we are focusing on more highly effective age-assurance measures. To be clear, there has to be rigorous enforcement, including of more risky sites. That is what I have talked about wanting Ofcom to do. We have taken powers in the Children Act 1989 to implement the results of this consultation, which includes restrictions on features and functions. One important issue is that if we restrict some features and functions, the companies will come up with others, but the powers in that Act allow us to move more qui"

— Liz Kendall Hansard

"My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, in his long campaign on this issue. My noble friend Lady Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville has long fought for those members of society who have found it hard, or impossible, to have their non-traditional homes recognised as a home, be they Travellers, Gypsies or, in this case, boaters. She has laid out extremely well why this Bill is needed. I lived on a houseboat on a rented mooring in the 1980s. Frankly, even nearly 50 years later, the issues have not really changed. My noble friend talked about how difficult it is to access services because a boat address is not recognised by many authorities. Clause 4 is absolutely key. Last year, the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, introduced an amendment to the then Renters’ Rights Bill on"

— Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer (LD) Hansard

"My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Bakewell, for bringing forward this Private Member’s Bill. The noble Baroness raises a very important issue, which, as she knows, we have debated before in your Lordships’ House. The Government recognise the important role that the waterways play in enriching people’s lives by providing homes for those who live on boats. With the housing crisis that we are only now beginning to tackle, the option is being considered by more and more people. The Government are committed to tackling insecurities across all housing sectors, including boat dwellers. The question before us is about not only housing rights but the practical management of finite public waterways and the ability of navigation authorities to discharge their statutory responsibilities. The "

— The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (Baroness Taylor of Stevenage) (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, it is very convenient that my noble friend Lady Scott is in the Chamber, so I can say many thanks for all that she has done and how she helped me come into the House. It is great following someone who is so good, because there is so much to learn and, fortunately, I am still able to access that learning, so I thank her very much. My noble friend Lady Eaton rightly raises concerns regarding changes to the qualifying period, removing opportunity for many. What is the Government’s evidence that this will work and why is the change being made from three to 10 years? In response to the noble Baroness, Lady Thornhill, who made either a compliment or a back-handed compliment—I am not sure which—it fundamentally comes down to our view that retaining a house with a family in it and not gi"

— Lord Jamieson (Con) Hansard

"It is a pleasure to speak under your chairmanship, Sir Alec. I thank everybody involved with the petition, whether they put their name to it or got it off the ground. Just outside my constituency of South Basildon and East Thurrock, there was an incident in which the remains of 37 dogs were found, along with 20 other living dogs, in varying states of ill health. It should go without saying that this was a deeply distressing incident locally and for everyone who became aware of it. Rightly, it shocked residents, generated significant local concern and led to more than 1,000 of my constituents signing this petition. Animals suffered, and that must never be minimised. What troubled many people locally was not simply what happened, but the response. Basildon council confirmed to my office that"

— James McMurdock (South Basildon and East Thurrock) (Ind) Hansard

"My Lords, these are excellent regulations, sorely needed, and I commend our Government for bringing them forward. There is one problem that concerns me. They do not cover all social renters and, therefore, there is an element of discrimination. I should declare an interest as an officeholder in various Gypsy and Traveller organisations, so my noble friend the Minister will not be surprised at what I am about to say. Indeed, I asked her a Question about this very thing because Gypsies and Travellers are not covered. Although they rent their houses from social landlords, their houses are, in fact, caravans—permanent caravans—and they have amenity blocks on the sites for the use of water. The problem is that the law does not correspond to reality. So, as I said, Gypsies and Travellers have th"

— Baroness Whitaker (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, the Government have brought forward a minor and technical amendment. Schedule 1 to the Bill currently amends Schedule 5 to the Consumer Rights Act 2015 to refer us to a statement of enforcement policy prepared by a direct enforcement authority. However, under paragraph 16F of Schedule 5, the statement will always be prepared by the Competition and Markets Authority and not a direct enforcement authority. The amendment therefore removes this provision to correct the drafting accordingly. I assure noble Lords that this is a very minor technical amendment that tidies the Bill without changing policy intent."

— Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, I start by drawing the House’s attention to my registered interests. I am chair of the Accessible Transport Policy Commission and a board member of Active Travel England. The Disability Discrimination Act was passed in 1995. It was the bare minimum of what it was possible to get through Parliament at the time. I sat on the National Disability Council, which oversaw the implementation of the DDA. That said that all trains would be step-free by 1 Jan 2020. In 2020 we were told it would be 100 years before I could get on the majority of trains in the UK without the permission or support of a member of staff. I need to live only another 94 years. I look forward to working with the Minister, who has extensive knowledge in this space, but all Governments for the past 30 years have allo"

— Baroness Grey-Thompson (CB) Hansard

"With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: Government new clauses 49 and 50 . New clause 1— Passengers’ Charter — “(1) The Secretary of State must, within six months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, lay before Parliament a Passengers’ Charter. (2) A Passengers’ Charter must include— (a) a guarantee about value for money, quality of service, and provision of adequate seating for any single part of a journey taken by rail for a duration greater than thirty minutes; (b) targets for reliability of services; (c) a timetable for implementing improvements to passenger accommodation on train services, including in relation to— (i) seat design, (ii) availability of high-speed WiFi and reliable cellular network service, (iii) provision of power outlets, (iv) storage f"

— Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani) Hansard

"It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on securing this debate, and for his record of campaigning on this issue. I also recognise the Federation of Master Builders for its important work in this area. I was proud to be at the launch of its “Licence to Build” report earlier this year. Like many other hon. Members, I have heard regularly from constituents who have gone through horrendous experiences with rogue builders, and I have seen people in tears in my surgeries after suffering the effects. One couple who came to see me had their home turned into a building site when builders left trenches dug up around their house, having taken £36,000 from them. When the couple were asked to pay double that cost and "

— Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD) Hansard

"I will do my best, Ms Furniss. I congratulate the hon. Member for Wyre Forest (Mark Garnier) on securing this debate on an issue that I know he has campaigned on for a long time, beginning when his party were in government. I really welcome the debate. I am grateful to the many Members who contributed to it for raising their constituents’ concerns and the horrifying cases that they have been dealing with in their constituencies. They set out the serious impacts that incompetent and rogue tradesmen have had on the homes and the physical and mental health of their constituents, who are sometimes elderly or vulnerable in other ways. I know from my own constituents the misery that can be caused and the toll it can take on people, as well as the time and money it takes to remedy problems. I tha"

— The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Kate Dearden) Hansard

"It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I am sure I speak for us all in extending warm thanks to you for stepping into the breach at the last minute to enable us to have this timely and important debate, and I thank the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green (Bambos Charalambous) for securing it. It is clear that UK business has global environmental and human rights impacts. UK business has impacts on climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, waste management, deforestation, and of course on human rights and labour rights, as we have already discussed. The Government have acknowledged those concerns. This debate comes at a particularly timely moment because, as the hon. Member for Southgate and Wood Green pointed out, we await with bated breath the Government release"

— Dr Ellie Chowns (North Herefordshire) (Green) Hansard

"My Lords, only someone who was there on the night of the Grenfell Tower fire or who experienced the loss of a loved one in that disaster can truly understand what it must have been like to suffer the physical and emotional losses that it caused. Death, injury, mental trauma, the sudden removal from a home, and the incalculable and continuing difficulties and questions for the emergency services and their personnel are just some of the consequences that come to mind, but there will be others. The noble Lord, Lord Roe, powerfully spoke about this, as others have pointed out, and I commend him for what he did with his colleagues on the night of 14 June 2017 and for what he said to us today. It is right that there should be a memorial to the people whose lives were lost or damaged by this fire"

— Lord Garnier (Con) Hansard

"First, I thank all those who have taken part in the debate. We have covered a lot of common ground but brought a lot of different perspectives to it. A number of hon. Members, including the Minister and the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul), and my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton West (Warinder Juss), mentioned community campaigns, which are an important part of Fairtrade. Others, such as the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Dr Chowns), have spoken about campaigns more generally,. Other hon. Members have also raised business— my hon. Friend the Member for Cumbernauld and Kirkintilloch (Katrina Murray) talked about what can go wrong when good practice is not in place, while others reflected on where business practice goes right. My hon. Friend the Memb"

— Martin Rhodes Hansard

"I congratulate the hon. Member for Lewes (James MacCleary) on securing this important debate. At a time when our country faces profound geopolitical uncertainty, when hostile states are probing every weakness in our democratic and economic systems, and when the US national security strategy talks about “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations”, one truth stands out above all others: as the Government’s anti-corruption strategy published earlier this week recognises, Britain’s security is the foundation of Britain’s prosperity. Before I progress any further, may I take this opportunity to commend the leadership of my hon. Friend the Member for Barnsley North (Dan Jarvis)? As the Security Minister, he has worked closely with the Government’s anti-corrupt"

— Phil Brickell (Bolton West) (Lab) Hansard

"I suppose, on the whole, I was trying to say that I want to try to take down tariff barriers where I possibly can, so that we can engage in free trade, but that only works when we have fair opportunities underlying it. The hon. Member for Strangford will correct me if I have this wrong, but I think there is a phrase in the Bible about justice and peace kissing one another. Sometimes we strive for justice, but it is not real justice if we do not get peace with it; and sometimes we strive for peace, but it is not real peace if it is not based on justice. That is the combination of Shalom and Tzedek, to use the Old Testament terms, that we are striving for with free and fair trade. As my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow North said, the Fairtrade Foundation has been around for more than 30 y"

— Chris Bryant Hansard

"My Lords, with Clause 11 and this group we move to the question of retention payments. We should not elide the question of late payments and retention payments, as if they were somehow part of the same argument. They are different arguments. Retention payments are not a late payment; they are a payment designed to allow the purchaser of a new building to have an opportunity to assess the quality of the new build and remedy any defects before the point at which a final payment is made. That is in theory. In practice, sometimes retention payments are a device for withholding cash, and they can be quite prejudicial to the contractor and imperil their cash flow. We all know that, for small businesses in particular, cash flow is of the essence. My amendments are intended to probe the circumstan"

— Lord Lansley (Con) Hansard

"It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I begin by paying tribute to Members from across the House for the incredibly thoughtful and personal stories that they have shared. I am very conscious that Members speak on behalf of their constituents, and that some Members speak from personal experience. Although I do not have that personal experience, I have a very close family member who does, and I have heard Members speak in the Chamber before about their own experiences and have reflected very carefully on the power of those remarks for those beyond the House who hear them. I thank Members very much for their contributions. I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for securing this very important debate, and for his continued interest in this issue. I kno"

— The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government (Nesil Caliskan) Hansard

"My Lords, I declare my interest as a councillor in central Bedfordshire. It is a delight to follow so many excellent speakers, such as not only the noble Lord, Lord Roe, but the noble Lord, Lord John, given his experience of Southwark. I also give my thanks to the committee and to the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor of Bolton, for their excellent work and this very helpful and useful report before us. This is a subject of real importance; it goes to the heart of two of the most pressing challenges that we face: ensuring that buildings are safe for those who live in them and ensuring that we can actually build the buildings that we need for our communities and people. There was a very interesting comment from the noble Lord, Lord Roe, that one of his big concerns is not just the safety of build"

— Lord Jamieson (Con) Hansard

"My Lords, it is an honour to follow the noble Lord, Lord Roe of West Wickham, whom we know has unparalleled expertise of not just the regulator but the service, in defence of safety and security in London. I declare that I am a member of the Industry and Regulators Committee, but I joined after this report was published. Nevertheless, I manage a residential block of flats in Norwich. Self-evidently, a building should be sufficiently safe for not just residents and occupiers but visitors, tenants and everybody else. We have all seen the consequences when things go wrong. When I was a member of the fire service pension scheme, we had a meeting on the morning of the Grenfell fire in the headquarters of the London Fire Brigade. None of us really knew the gravity of what was unfurling before us"

— Lord Fuller (Con) Hansard

"My Lords, I am pleased to introduce this debate on the report The Building Safety Regulator : Building a Better Regulator , which was published by the Industry and Regulators Committee in early December. As is often the case, we have to wait some time for these debates, but the issues that we raised are still very relevant. I place on record my thanks to members of the committee and our whole team for the work that they have done. I particularly mention the noble Lord, Lord Best, who was the first person to alert us to the problems that we should be looking into as a committee. I also thank Dominic Cooper, our researcher, for the sterling work that he put in. There is a wealth of experience in this Room. My noble friend Lord Roe will give us the insider’s view, my noble friend Lady Warwick"

— Baroness Taylor of Bolton (Lab) Hansard

"I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Llanfaes, for tabling the amendments and explaining them, and for the support given to her by my noble friends Lady Chakrabarti and Lady O’Grady of Upper Holloway, and the noble Lord, Lord Russell of Liverpool, and for the comments from the noble Lord, Lord Cameron of Lochiel, and the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, on the Front Benches, and the noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley, and the noble Lord, Lord Blencathra. The Government’s concerns about the amendment do not reflect those expressed by the noble Lords, Lord Cameron and Lord Blencathra, and the noble Baronesses, Lady Doocey and Lady Fox. They made valid points, but they are not ones I will deploy in the argument against the contributions in the debate. I am grateful also for the com"

— Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab) Hansard

"If the noble Baroness will allow me, we have agreed that we will take Amendment 330C away and have a look at it. That is not a guarantee that we will do something with it, but it is an opportunity to reflect on it. She can examine what, if anything, the Government do, and she can determine whether to table it again on Report. Amendment 330B, again tabled by my noble friend Lady Royall, would introduce a stalking protection notice that could be imposed by a police superintendent. I think my noble friend’s motivation is to ensure that swift action can be taken. However, on reflection we view that introducing such a notice would potentially put further complexity into the legislative framework without significantly improving protection for victims. We also need to consider the proportionality"

— Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, stalking is an offence which constitutes severe harassment and can instil grave fear into victims, as we have just heard. It is absolutely right that the law bears down on perpetrators of stalking. The Stalking Protection Act 2019 gave magistrates’ courts the power to impose stalking protection orders on application by the chief officer of police. Clause 97 extends this power so that a Crown Court can impose such an order where a person has been acquitted of any other offence. The Government will no doubt argue that they are taking the necessary action to further prevent cases of stalking through this part of the Bill, but let us not forget another Bill they are currently taking through your Lordships’ House. The Sentencing Bill will suspend sentences for anyone charged with the "

— Lord Davies of Gower (Con) Hansard

"With this it will be convenient to discuss the following: New clause 2— Re-sentencing those serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection — “(1) The Lord Chancellor must make arrangements for, and relating to, the re-sentencing of all prisoners serving IPP sentences within 18 months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed. (2) Those arrangements must include arrangements relating to the establishment of a committee to provide advice regarding the discharge of the Lord Chancellor’s duty under subsection (1). (3) The committee established by virtue of subsection (2) must include a judge nominated by the Lord Chief Justice. (4) A court that imposed an IPP sentence has the power to re-sentence the prisoner in relation to the original offence. (5) But the court may not impos"

— Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani) Hansard

"I am going to make a short speech on new clause 27, tabled in my name and the name of other hon. Members. After a short relationship, my constituent Sophie Hall has suffered and continues to suffer from a prolonged and relentless stalking campaign from her ex-partner, who was residing illegally in the UK. In November last year, he was arrested for these offences, but was never spoken to about them, as no interpreter could be found. No risk assessment was done, and he was placed in temporary accommodation on bail, which he continued to breach. In February, Sophie’s ex-partner was convicted and sentenced under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and was subsequently deported to his home country of Brazil with a 10-year re-entry ban effective from March. He then made his way to Europe, tr"

— Emma Lewell (South Shields) (Lab) Hansard

"My Lords, in moving Motion A, I will speak to Motions B, C and D. Before I begin my main remarks, today marks Stephen Lawrence Day, 33 years to the day since the loss of Stephen. My noble friend Lady Lawrence of Clarendon is in the Chamber today, and I pay tribute to her for her campaigning activity over those 33 years. I was pleased to join my noble friend earlier today for an event at the King’s Trust in Southwark to continue the campaigning work of the Stephen Lawrence Day Foundation. Today is a good opportunity for us to remember Stephen and to recommit to continue to make a stand against racism in all its forms. I wanted to place that on record on behalf of the whole House before we commenced the Crime and Policing Bill, which in itself deals with a number of issues that are important"

— The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab) Hansard

"I hope we are on the home straight with this enormous piece of legislation. I start by welcoming the fact that the House of Lords has heeded many of the arguments and votes in this House last week—of the 19 issues that I went through in my speech last Tuesday, we are now down to just four. As for those four, we have again listened carefully to the points raised in the Lords and tabled further amendments in lieu. Let me turn first to amendments 2D and 2E on fining for profit, tabled by Liberal Democrat Front Benchers. I again recognise the concerns expressed about enforcement agencies potentially issuing fixed penalty notices for antisocial behaviour offences where there may be a financial incentive to do so. We have listened to those concerns, and hon. Members will recall that last week we"

— Sarah Jones Hansard

"Clause 48 amends the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 to align it more closely with the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 for England and Wales where there are references to UK armed forces. These are minor and technical amendments and do not change the substance of the legislation. Clause 48 simply substitutes the outdated reference to “the Royal Navy Regulating Branch” with “the Royal Navy Police”. It also removes reference to “the Royal Marines Police”, which has been incorporated into the Royal Navy police. Lastly, clause 48 omits reference to the repealed single service Acts: the Army Act 1955, the Air Force Act 1955 and the Naval Discipline Act 1957. I commend the clause to the Committee."

— Al Carns Hansard

"If I may say so, and as long as it is not indiscreet, my hon. Friend seems far younger and more energetic than she claims to be. She makes an important point because she does have long-standing experience in this area; before she came to this place she practised for a long time. I do not know when my hon. Friend finished practising, but we know that—it is one of the central insights of the independent review—the average jury Crown court trial is taking twice as long as it did in 2000. That increase is driven by a greater complexity in cases and the changing profile of crime. As I have said before, we now have forensic and CCTV evidence, and also—this is something to commend people from previous Parliaments for—procedural safeguards put in place over time that rightly create a fairer system"

— Sarah Sackman Hansard

"I will go on to my next bit, which is even more relevant than my previous bit. The Police (Detention and Bail) Act 2011 is Parliament’s most recent example of retrospective criminal legislation. It reversed the effect of the High Court’s decision in R (on the application of Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police) v . Salford Magistrates’ Court and Hookway on the calculation of detention time under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, and did so by deeming the amendments always to have had effect. They had not. The then Policing Minister described the matter as too urgent to await a Supreme Court appeal. This Government have made no case that the current backlog is so urgent that it must be all shifted to the magistrates court. It wants to tackle the backlog, yes, by changing th"

— Joe Robertson Hansard