The Lord Privy Seal (Baroness Smith of Basildon) (Lab)
My Lords, I thank their Majesties for gracing us with their presence today as we begin the second Session of this Parliament. To reinforce the comments made by the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, they acted with professionalism, with dignity and, of course, with humour today, as we also saw in their recent visit to the United States. I am sure that the whole House would want to say how very proud of them we are: not just for paving the way for the removal of tariffs on Scottish whisky.
It is a great pleasure to follow all noble Lords who have spoken. I particularly thank the proposer and seconder of the humble Address. For those relatively new to your Lordships’ House, every Session of Parliament starts with this debate. A Motion is proposed, as we have heard, by a long-standing, respected Member, including one who rather harshly described himself as an “old codger”, and is then seconded by a more recent “one to watch” colleague.
My noble friend Lady Crawley is certainly experienced. She has been a local councillor, spent 15 years as a Member of the European Parliament and nearly 28 years in your Lordships’ House. As a Government Whip covering a range of portfolios, she then served as Deputy Chief Whip in Opposition. She was our Lords Cabinet Office spokesperson when I was a Commons Minister and, then as now, I valued her wise counsel. Yet her route into politics was not perhaps the most conventional. She became involved after meeting some politicians when she was lobbying for funding for youth theatre. She has continually championed the performing arts, although too few of you have been privileged, as I have been, to witness her acting skills or hear her accents. Even fewer will know of her success at stand-up comedy. Noble Lords may have got a sense of it today—her speech was a great example of how humour can help get a message across.
However, alongside those skills, my noble friend has a depth of commitment to serious issues. In this place, we hear a lot of speeches, and just some linger in our memories as being exceptional. Some 15 years ago, my noble friend opened her debate on the contribution of women in the Special Operations Executive during the Second World War. Having spoken of their extraordinary heroism, she ensured that the names of each and every one of them were recorded for ever in Hansard. Her speech today was characteristically insightful and engaging.
What can I say about my noble friend Lord Roe? He has impressed many since arriving here. As he said, he served in the Armed Forces and as a firefighter, then as London Fire Commissioner, and now as chair of the building safety regulator. He has had to manage sensitive issues and has a well-deserved reputation for doing so with humility. His professionalism, experience and skills, and empathy were never more needed than when he arrived on the scene of the Grenfell Tower fire—recollections of which he shared with your Lordships’ House when he made his maiden speech and during the passage of the Grenfell Tower memorial Bill. He cares deeply about social justice, safety, public service and Parliament. He is an asset to this House and we look forward to his future contributions. And I am going to appoint him another job, by making him the fire safety training monitor. Those in the Chamber for my noble friend’s maiden speech may recall his lifelong passion for boxing. We are hoping that that competitive spirit is going to be put to good use, because he has signed up to join this House’s tug-of-war team in the competition against the Commons.
Before we turn to the gracious Speech, I want to take a moment, as others have done, to reflect on the past Session. Personally, it is an enormous privilege to serve as the Lord Privy Seal, representing both the Government in this House and the interests of your Lordships at Cabinet. I hope noble Lords acknowledge that I have sought to strike the right balance between the two and, alongside our first-rate team of Ministers, have engaged with colleagues across the House, taken on concerns and, where appropriate, acted on them.
In many ways, it is not surprising that the previous Session was longer, with a new Government facing key issues against a backdrop of increasing uncertainty across the world. We wanted to move forward and make progress. It has been referenced already that Parliament passed over 60 Bills that reflected the Government’s values. We established a new Border Security Command, set up Great British Energy, gave the police new powers to address anti-social behaviour and introduced fairer sentencing. We gave stronger rights to millions who are renting their own homes, started improving the life chances of young people, and provided those in work with vital new protections and better pay.
In recognition of my responsibilities to this House, I listened and responded to concerns raised during the passage of the hereditary Peers Bill and set up a Select Committee on the issues that were most raised, retirement and participation. I thank its members and my noble friend Lady Taylor of Bolton for their work and I look forward to receiving its report. I was also pleased that I was able to address long-standing concerns in your Lordships’ House about the number of unpaid Government Ministers and to bring in new legislation. That is an example of how good will and consensus can achieve real change in this House.
A change in government always requires a period of adjustment. Much has been written about the challenges of moving from opposition to government, but there is no manual for travelling in the opposite direction. Having come into your Lordships’ House following an election defeat, I know how it feels. As Gerald Kaufman noted in his book, How to Be a Minister:
“There will be the terrible moment when the minister who replaced you rises to speak on the subject you have made your own. It will be bad if he performs less well than you used to, intolerable if he performs better”.
The work of opposition is challenging, but it is vital to our democracy. Governments need robust and responsible scrutiny, and those who have recently held office know how to prioritise what really matters. As we have heard, our conventions are underpinned by respect for self-regulation and the core constitutional principle of the primacy of the elected Chamber. As the unelected House, we complement the work of MPs, who must always have the final say.
I reference my dual role again in a slightly different context. It may seem a contradiction to some to say that I, along with my noble friend the Chief Whip, have the responsibility to ensure that the Government get their legislation through and that we also value scrutiny. That is the reality of life in government in the House of Lords, and I am sure that my predecessors will acknowledge that.
We have heard today about the Salisbury/Addison convention. I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, for his recent work on how it has evolved over time. Perhaps I have too much time on my hands, but I have also reread the 2006 Cunningham report and the Wakeham report from 2000. It seems strange to some that this House relies on conventions and not on hard and fast rules, but it can and generally does work. Amendments are proposed, but the Government get their legislation through in reasonable time. But, as the noble Lord, Lord True, and the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, have recognised, those conventions have recently been stretched a bit further than most of can remember. It is within our rights to ask the elected Chamber to reconsider, but I agree with the noble Lord, Lord True, and the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull—and I am grateful for their comments—that ping-pong should be limited and proportionate.
The noble Earl also spoke of the increased number of late-night sittings. Although the noble Lord, Lord Roe, clearly enjoys the additional time that he spends with my noble friend Lord Kennedy, we also want to limit this—but it feels that the number of amendments has been steadily increasing. Without restraint, there is a risk that key issues are crowded out by those of a second or third order. Ultimately, it is up to your Lordships’ House, but I feel that we can be more focused on Report, as the noble Lord, Lord True, indicated. The Chief Whip and I will do what we can to assist.
I am grateful to the noble Lords, Lord True and Lord Purvis, and to the Chief Whips and the Convenor. The joint letter that we will send out today to all noble Lords reminds us of how we can do our best work within the conventions of this House. Perhaps it reminds us that good scrutiny depends not on the length of the speech or the number of times we speak but the value of the content of what we have to say.
The Government’s programme for this Session is ambitious, as we have heard, reflecting the very serious challenges that we face. We live in turbulent and uncertain times, and the public rightly expect government to respond appropriately. Events in the Middle East are impacting on the global economy, and the aftershocks are being felt and will be felt for some time. They are adding to the pressures on the pound in people’s pockets, which is why we will continue efforts to strengthen our economy and drive up living standards.
A decade on from the referendum, Brexit has created real challenges. Rather than slashing red tape, the current deal has imposed expensive and lengthy processes on companies of all shapes and sizes. I was interested to hear from noble Lords opposite. I think that the noble Lord, Lord True, takes the view that the Bill goes far too far, and the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, is saying that it does not go far enough. That should create some interesting debates.
We will bring forward measures to ease trade with an economically pragmatic approach. Legislation will give effect to new agreements in areas where there is a benefit to the UK through greater alignment. Our manifesto promise of an improved and ambitious relationship includes a veterinary agreement to ease the movement of agri-food goods. Given global events, our relationships with our closest allies have never been more important.
On changes to competition law, we will see a new regulatory sandbox—a word that we will get to know well—where innovations can be tested. We will also have a duty on key regulators to help fuel growth. This is key if we are going to boost productivity.
In other sectors, including financial services and civil aviation, we will seek to modernise regulation, remove unnecessary burdens and ensure that consumer protections are fit for this age. There will also be measures to tackle late payments, which are a major scourge for small businesses and cost our economy billions.
When we took office, public services were struggling from years of underfunding and ill-considered reforms. Initial steps were taken in our first Session to turn that around, and we will now go even further. We have listened to parents, and we will give every child the chance to achieve and thrive, including through reform to special educational needs provisions.
With the failures of our water companies so endemic, we will carry out wholesale reform to put consumers first. We will make changes to rail governance and oversight and deliver a fair settlement for the north of England. We will tackle the bureaucracy in our National Health Service to improve patient care, and address issues in relation to police performance, governance and accountability.
Further—the noble Lord, Lord True, made reference to this—we will bring forward legislation to enable steel nationalisation. Preserving domestic steel-making is vital, which the why the Government urgently intervened last year to preserve Scunthorpe’s blast furnaces. We must now take further action to safeguard production and deliver value for money.
I say to all noble Lords who have spoken that I am really grateful for their support so that we can work together in this House on the key issue of security. It is the first duty of any Government to protect the security and safety of our citizens, as well as our infrastructure. We will renew the legal basis for the Armed Forces, extend the Armed Forces covenant legal duty and establish the defence housing service. We will also increase the resilience of our critical national infrastructure and related supply chains against cyber attacks.
Following the horror of Southport, we will bring forward measures relating to the depiction of acts of extreme violence and the planning of mass casualty attacks. New proscription-like tools will tackle state-linked threats, making the UK a tougher environment for foreign intelligence services and their proxies to operate in. All of us should unite to ensure that we act against and call out the vile antisemitism that creates such fear and tries to threaten our communities.
Everyone has felt the effects of higher energy prices at home and at the petrol pump. This shows the urgency of boosting home-grown power and, with it, our energy security. We have already acted to bring down bills and expand green energy. We will do more to reduce our reliance on imported fossil fuels and support the expansion of nuclear energy.
Although many of these matters are knotty and complex, I am confident that the Government will benefit from noble Lords’ expertise. In answer to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, I reaffirm my commitment: nearly two years ago, I said that, when this House expresses a constructive view, the Government should treat that with respect. Parts of our programme will provoke spirited debate. My ministerial colleagues and I will welcome scrutiny and challenge—perhaps we will not always welcome it, but we will always take it seriously.
Making progress in the areas outlined in the gracious Speech will help ensure that people across our country benefit from economic growth, have access to the public services they deserve, and have confidence in our individual and collective security. I am proud of our Government’s programme. I look forward to our debates and to working with you all in the coming Session. I am very pleased to support the Motion to adjourn the House.