House of Lords
Introduction: Lord Petterson
Introduction: Baroness Garnham
Procedural Flexibility: Scrutiny of AI and Emerging Technology
Lord Nagaraju
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what consideration the Procedure and Privileges Committee has given to introducing greater procedural flexibility to ensure that the House is able to undertake effective scrutiny of significant and fast-moving policy areas, such as AI and emerging technology.
Lord Nagaraju (Lab)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper. In doing so, I draw attention to my AI and digital interests set out in the register.
The Senior Deputy Speaker (Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede)
My Lords, our procedures allow flexibility, including topical Oral Questions, Private Notice Questions and Questions for Written Answer. The Government also offer regular statements, and Urgent Questions asked in the House of Commons are often repeated in your Lordships’ House. The noble Lord himself has used a number of these avenues to raise matters related to AI. The Procedure and Privileges Committee has not discussed scrutiny of AI and emerging technology. However, it is open to considering any proposals.
Lord Nagaraju (Lab)
My Lords, September brought UN findings, the Prime Minister’s G20 AI pledge, international warnings and an AI agent breaching Australia’s Medicare statistics portal days apart. My balloted options were weeks away. Taking up the committee’s invitation for proposals, will the Senior Deputy Speaker help the UK set the global standard for parliamentary scrutiny of AI by proposing at its next meeting a pilot for one sitting term to have a protected weekly AI session of up to 30 minutes with cross-government updates and questions on opportunities, risks and delivery on commitments?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
I will ensure that this proposal is drawn to the attention of the Procedure and Privileges Committee. As noble Lords will be aware, the Committee needs to balance a range of demands on the House’s time, and any proposal for dedicated scrutiny arrangements on one policy topic must be considered against other important policy areas. Artificial intelligence is clearly of great importance. Noble Lords will have an opportunity to debate one aspect of this issue—the impact of AI on children—later today during the debate in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Patel.
Lord McLoughlin (Con)
My Lords, it is incumbent on us all to try to understand artificial intelligence and use our own intelligence to get around it. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker do all he can to draw to the attention of other Members of your Lordships’ House the availability of digital training on AI and the way in which the House provides those facilities for all to take advantage of?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
I thank the noble Lord for raising that and pointing it out to the House, which he did extremely effectively. I think many Members of the House, if not all, have at least dabbled—if I can put it that way—in AI. Last week, I was in Rome at the Council of Europe’s European Conference of Presidents of Parliament, which addressed AI. It is true that parliaments across Europe and the world are using AI in different ways. We are all finding our way in this; it is an ongoing learning experience. I thank the noble Lord for drawing that training to the House’s attention.
Baroness Bull (CB)
My Lords, effective scrutiny of future-facing risks and opportunities is not just about time but the full range and diversity of our membership. While I appreciate this falls outside the scope of the committee that is the subject of the Question, does the Senior Deputy Speaker agree that the House, and those people who make the decisions about membership, must do their best to ensure that we are fully equipped to face the future in the expertise we bring to the issues that we debate?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
That is an easy proposition to agree with. The noble Lord, Lord Nagaraju, brings his own expertise, which he demonstrated through this Question. In a sense, this House justifies itself by its expertise; I am sure that all the political parties and the Cross Benches are very conscious of that and want to maintain high standards within this House.
Lord Grocott (Lab)
Does the Senior Deputy Speaker agree that we could have far better consideration of a number of issues, including AI, if the House started sitting at a more sensible time? Has he seen the views—I am sorry to see them, because they are the views of very senior Members—of the Procedure and Privileges Committee? It simply suggested two options: do nothing or do as little as possible. Does the Senior Deputy Speaker agree that we would be far better off if we started most days—not Monday, but the rest of the week—at 11 am?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
As the noble Lord may know, a debate on that very subject will be held at 12 pm in the Moses Room. The proposition before the House is that we should start at 1 pm on Tuesdays and Wednesdays. To date, there have been 360 responses to that proposition, which is a great improvement on the last time this matter was considered, about four years ago. I encourage all noble Lords to respond. The consultation closes at 5 pm on 13 November. If there is to be change, it will be for the House to decide whether that change is enacted.
Lord Harper (Con)
My Lords, the Question from the noble Lord, Lord Nagaraju, is about procedural flexibility, which the House will use shortly in the PNQ on whether the Government have successfully responded to the PHP security threat. Can I use a bit of procedural flexibility and ask the Senior Deputy Speaker to assure noble Lords that the House responded swiftly, that its information technology systems have been patched, and that that security flaw has been fixed?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
The answer to that question is yes. I say that because the Clerk of the Parliaments nodded at me while the noble Lord asked his question.
Lord Alton of Liverpool (CB)
My Lords, the Senior Deputy Speaker will be aware that, in September, the Joint Committee on Human Rights published a 94-page report on AI and human rights, which was unanimous. It has not yet been listed for debate in your Lordships’ House, because it cannot be until the Government respond. Will the Senior Deputy Speaker look at that procedure so that, when Select Committees publish reports, the House can be informed at the earliest possible time? Please can he also encourage the Government to respond, so that such a debate can take place?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
I recognise the noble Lord’s point and the very important nature of that report. When reports should be tabled for debate is a matter for the usual channels. I note that some committees debate before the Government have responded; that might be something that the noble Lord wishes to consider. Nevertheless, I see that the Chief Whip is here, and I am sure that the noble Lord’s point is well understood.
Lord Watts (Lab)
My Lords, is it not the case that international agreement and regulation is needed? We need that as quickly as possible, given the pace of this matter.
The Senior Deputy Speaker
The noble Lord is absolutely right. As I said, I was at a debate about this in Rome, where every speaker made that point. It is also true that the rate of change is happening so fast that we need to be cautious and think about the way we need to regulate this matter. A point made a number of times last week is that, internationally, we regulate air travel, and drugs and pharmacy. This issue is of equal importance, so I absolutely take the noble Lord’s point.
Baroness Harman (Lab)
Picking up on the question the noble Lord just asked, does the Senior Deputy Speaker agree that we need to look at overhauling the procedure of how we legislate on AI, because AI moves so fast? Even when agreement is reached about what needs to happen, the legislative process is so slow that, by the time the legislation has come into force, new problems have arisen. Does the Senior Deputy Speaker agree that there could be a joint committee of this House and the House of Commons that could have delegated powers to legislate on AI? That way, we would keep up with the speed of AI, which is currently bringing this legislature into disrepute, because we always seem to be behind the game.
The Senior Deputy Speaker
The noble Baroness makes a very fair point. This issue is not limited to AI; it affects many other areas. In my previous area of justice, there was a constant frustration that the legislative process was proceeding very slowly. Nevertheless, the noble Baroness makes a specific recommendation about creating a joint committee to look at AI, and I will bring it to the attention of the PPC.
Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab)
Will the noble Lord assure us that our staff, not just ourselves, are able to use AI where appropriate, particularly in dealing with, for example, responses to consultations and Select Committee inquiries?
The Senior Deputy Speaker
Yes, I can give that assurance. The staff within the House use AI in a number of ways and there is ongoing training, I understand. There is also training for Members of this House.
Public Procurement: Prioritising British Suppliers
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Spellar
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of WTO rules and EU regulations on their ability to prioritise British suppliers for public procurement.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)
We are changing public procurement to work harder for Britain. In the last six months, this Government have issued new guidance on steel transparency requirements and the use of the national security exemption, as well as revising their social value model to support local communities. These reforms will support growth, create more jobs and strengthen skills while complying with our international agreements, and we will continue to do more.
Lord Spellar (Lab)
I thank the Minister for that reply, but can she reflect on the fact that we are still getting replies from Ministers that their ability to preference British manufacturers, for example of buses, is constrained by the World Trade Organization and our agreements with the EU? Yet the United States is a member of the WTO, and not only does it have “buy American” legislation on the statute book but the federal Government mandate in their grants to states and local authorities that they have to buy American. Within the EU, the founding members Italy, Germany and France blatantly preference their own suppliers. Can we change the mindset inside government to put British industry and British workers first?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
The Government have been working to ensure that public procurement plays its full role in delivering our industrial strategy. My noble friend is right about the value of public procurement: every year, this country spends around £400 billion. We think that the new social value model will encourage contracting authorities, including central government departments, to deliver good-quality jobs, skills and opportunities in communities. We believe we can do this while still upholding our international commitments. Guidance will be published in the near future.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, the Trade Act specifically stipulated that farm produce imports should meet the same high animal welfare and environmental standards as this country’s. Can the Minister assure the House that that is happening, and will she investigate the reason why country of origin rules have not been applied so that the consumer can be aware of which country produce is coming from?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I will look into the noble Baroness’s second point and commit to write to her. The Government are open to considering all lawful means of achieving our ambition that half of all food purchased across the public sector should be locally produced or certified to higher environmental standards. Our commitment to farmers and growers in this respect remains steadfast.
Lord Pack (LD)
My Lords, a crucial element of getting procurement right is transparency, so that British suppliers know what they can bid for and we can all judge how the public sector is doing in awarding contracts. But the latest research by procurement specialist Chris Smith shows that, since the transparency requirements in the Procurement Act came into force, three in 10 public contracts have not been published, despite the legal requirements to do so. When can we expect the public sector to start fully complying with that requirement of the law?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I am not aware of the point the noble Lord raises, but I thank him for drawing it to my attention. I will look into it and revert to him.
Lord Tyrie (Non-Afl)
My Lords, the WTO is widely held to be in deep trouble. Its dispute resolution mechanism is scarcely used and countries are imposing unilateral tariffs everywhere. The UK has to reconsider its position in the light of this. To think that through—that was part of what the noble Lord implied in his Question—have the Government made an assessment of the overall effect of the decline in WTO effectiveness on UK trade?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
The World Trade Organization remains a really effective way for us to enable British businesses to get that reciprocal access to £1.3 trillion in public procurement opportunities overseas annually. We think that this is a valuable way of ensuring that our suppliers and businesses get access to opportunities across the world.
Lord Watts (Lab)
My Lords, when the Government produce their guidance, will they notify local and regional governments about their decision and expect them to abide by the rules or suggestions they make? Quite frankly, a lot of procurement is done through those bodies.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I agree that a lot of procurement is done through local authorities. There are some really good examples from local areas of what local government already does. We will endeavour to make sure that local government is aware of the new regime in the same way as we want central government to adapt how it works.
Lord Deben (Con)
The noble Baroness has again committed the Government to buying from local farmers throughout the system. The trouble is that the Government do not publish facts regularly so that we can see how they are doing. Everyone locally knows perfectly well that it is not working at the moment. Can she assure the House that we will have regular updates about the proportion of food in schools that is bought locally, where the food comes from and how often people look carefully at where it comes from to see whether, as my noble friend pointed out, it meets the same standards that we insist British farmers meet?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
My understanding is that food standards in schools are an issue that the Department for Education has been looking at. It feels like it would be easy for me to commit to that but quite difficult for us necessarily to deliver it. I will look into the noble Lord’s point and get back to him.
Lord Fox (LD)
My Lords, the noble Lord is right to ask this Question. When we discussed the public procurement Act in 2023, it was an issue of great interest. There is an opportunity and a remit for this: authorities can pursue UK jobs, skills, local supply chains and social value through properly designed award criteria and contract conditions. Is the Minister satisfied that the public bodies have that skill and knowledge to properly design those contracts so that we can make sure that British businesses can get them?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
The noble Lord is right that you can do a lot within the rules to ensure that we really focus on the benefit of British spend for the British population and British jobs. This is largely why we published the new social value model, which has a much sharper focus on good-quality jobs, skills and opportunities. We have committed to publishing guidance on that and establishing pilots with mayoral strategic authorities on this before the new approach comes into force on 1 January next year.
Baroness Finn (Con)
My Lords, the Government have committed to prioritise national security in our procurement processes. How will that policy affect the Government’s flagship gimmick, Great British Energy? Might it mean an end to our reliance on Chinese solar panels?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
There is nothing gimmicky about our work on Great British Energy. It is intended to deliver for the British population and it will. We are clear that the national security guidance supports the use of the national security exemption in a way that is consistent with our domestic procurement regime and international trade agreements on procurement and will continue to do so.
Lord Browne of Belmont (DUP)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that WTO procurement rules and, in Northern Ireland, the continued application of EU procurement rules can make it harder to prioritise UK-built buses? What are the Government doing to ensure that investment in zero-emission buses supports jobs in Great Britain and Northern Ireland, as well as greener transport?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
The Department for Transport recently published a 10-year pipeline for zero-emission buses, covering procurement through to 2035. This will help give British manufacturers the long-term capacity they need to plan ahead and invest in their workforce. It will benefit producers and manufacturers from across the UK.
Baroness Smith of Llanfaes (PC)
My Lords, if the Government are serious about growth in every postcode, what specific actions are they taking to make sure that smaller businesses are able to scale up, grow and compete with companies in the bigger cities across the UK?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
We want SMEs to benefit from the Government’s spend in the same way as larger companies and manufacturers. For that reason, on 23 March, the Government published new targets for the amount we will spend with SMEs by the end of March 2028. Small businesses across the country are set to receive over £7.4 billion of government money a year by 2028. We hope that this will help them grow but, in particular, it will also help make sure that we get the best opportunities for small businesses.
Carers Action Plan
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Pitkeathley
To ask His Majesty’s Government how they intend to ensure that the Cross-Government Carers Action Plan achieves lasting change for unpaid carers and their families.
Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Hyde of Bemerton) (Lab)
My Lords, the Government want the action plan to deliver lasting change for unpaid carers and their families. We will publish annual progress updates, meet annually with unpaid carers to hear their experiences, and refresh the plan to maintain momentum and accountability. In addition, the unpaid carers champion will drive progress and work with carers organisations. The cross-government ministerial group, chaired by Minister McGovern, will provide quarterly oversight supported by regular official level co-ordination.
Baroness Pitkeathley (Lab)
I thank the Minister for that reply. It is a great pleasure to welcome her to the Dispatch Box on her first outing. These initiatives for carers are hugely welcome, of course, but co-ordination is going to be of great importance. Can the Minister say a little more about how the unpaid carers champion, which is a wonderful new initiative, will be involved with overseeing or delivering the carers action plan, and how that in turn will link with the work being done by the noble Baroness, Lady Casey, and her commission?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
Until May this year, I was the executive member for health and adult social care at Islington Council, and I regularly met with unpaid carers and supported the carers’ hub there. This gave me first-hand experience of the absolutely incredible people who are unpaid carers. I want to use this opportunity to express the Government’s gratitude to all those unpaid carers who provide that vital support to family, friends and neighbours.
To return to the noble Baroness’s question, the champion will build on commitments in the Government’s unpaid carers’ action plan and enable efforts to improve the identification and support of unpaid carers. Work is under way to establish the role, including how it will complement existing activity across government and that crucial wider adult social care reform.
Baroness Pidgeon (LD)
My Lords, first, I welcome the Minister to her place. However, will the Government commit to a statutory guarantee so that unpaid carers have access to regular, reliable respite care, rather than support being dependent on reaching a point of crisis or on where someone happens to live?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for the welcome. Local authorities already have duties under the Care Act to assess carers’ needs and meet eligible needs, while the better care fund can support respite, short breaks and provide peer support. However, funding and duties must result in meaningful support on the ground, so we will continue to examine how effectively existing arrangements are working and consider whether further action is required to enable more support. We recognise the importance of unpaid carers receiving high-quality support wherever they live in the United Kingdom.
Lord Young of Cookham (Con)
My Lords, there are 15,000 schoolchildren caring for parents and siblings for over 50 hours a week, and of those 3,000 are between the ages of five and nine. Those young carers are most at risk of missing school, being suspended and underachieving, and they are not identified for three years, on average. Will the action plan mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, enable those young carers to be identified much earlier, so they get the help and support they deserve?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for his work in this area, and I appreciate his raising this very important point. The carers action plan has a whole section on children and young carers, and the action plan overall is split into three sections, the first of which is: recognise. To the noble Lord’s point, we understand how easy it is for children and young people, in particular, to go under the radar. A cross-ministerial group will be working on this, including Minister Waugh, who is responsible for early education years, and Minister McGovern, as well as colleagues from DWP and the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade.
Recognition of carers, whichever part of the life phase they are in, is profoundly important, and we recognise that young carers make a particular contribution. As the noble Lord said, the consideration of children, particularly those aged five to nine—which is incredibly young—raises a different range of concerns, which we wish to respond to. We recognise that children and young people should not be expected to undertake excessive or inappropriate caring responsibilities, which can really affect their educational prospects, as the noble Lord said. It is important that the whole family can access the right support at the right time.
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB)
My Lords, almost 90,000 of these young carers have been identified, but over half of schools have not reported any young carers, which is particularly worrying. What powers will the champion have to make sure that local authorities are providing support and putting identification processes in place for these young people, and that that support is not only during their period of caring but extends into a period of bereavement, when they are looking after seriously ill parents or siblings?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
This Government are committed to breaking down barriers to opportunity for all young people, including young carers, and every young carer is entitled to an assessment to ensure they receive the support they need. Local authorities have that duty of care, and we fully support the “No Wrong Doors for Young Carers” memorandum of understanding, which promotes stronger joint working between adult and children’s care services.
The role of the champion and exactly how that will dovetail with existing work and departments is still being worked out. The appointment will be announced in due course, and at that time we will also announce how that will integrate with ongoing work. I also draw the noble Baroness’s attention to the cross-departmental small ministerial working group, which will be looking at this issue. The inclusion of Minister Waugh, as the early education Minister, is crucial to ensuring that all schools in every local authority are doing all they can to support young carers and children bereaved at an early age.
The Earl of Effingham (Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Pitkeathley, rightly highlighted co-ordination. If NHS England is to be abolished in 2027, does that not create an issue in ensuring clear accountability for the delivery of this incredibly important cross-government carers action plan?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
I would have thought the opposite was true. The whole reason why the Government have agreed to the abolition of NHSE is to increase direct ministerial accountability within the Department of Health and Social Care, as previously mentioned in other answers—and, in this case, the DWP, DBIST and DfE.
Baroness Keeley (Lab)
My Lords, I tried a number of times in the other place to bring forward a Bill on the identification of carers, because GPs and other health professionals can be inconsistent in identifying them. As we have heard from the noble Lord, Lord Young, young carers are the most hidden group of carers. It is good to see that the Government’s first priority in the action plan is to improve identification and recognition of unpaid carers, but I urge my noble friend and Health Ministers to make urgent progress on this priority, because it is the vital first step in improving the support we give to unpaid carers.
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
My noble friend makes a very important point. “Recognise”, “refer” and “reach” are the three orders of priority, and “recognise” is obviously the first piece of the puzzle. Whatever your age and life stage, you can be referred to the appropriate support; then, “reach” is about enabling people with unpaid caring responsibilities to reach their potential, whether they wish to be in work or in education—whatever is appropriate for that person. As my noble friend knows, when you become a carer the rest of your life does not just stop overnight; often, these things are incremental. For many, what begins as helping a loved one out is suddenly hours and hours a week of providing unpaid care.
Baroness Tyler of Enfield (LD)
My Lords, the action plan contains a welcome commitment to exploring modernising the carer’s allowance, and it includes the possibility of replacing the earnings cliff edge with a taper. When will this work move beyond initial scoping, and when will we hear substantive proposals?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her work in this area and for her question. As noble Lords will know, this Government have already increased the carer’s allowance and increased the amount of earnings allowance. We are working on this as a commitment; it is a priority for the Prime Minister to support unpaid carers. I will write to the noble Baroness with more information about a taper and a timeline.
Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Con)
My Lords, I welcome the Minister to her new role; she brings great experience in adult social care from the London Borough of Islington. She will know that many carers are struggling with family and friends who are suffering from vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s and that often, once a patient receives a diagnosis, there is no real action plan in place to look after those people or an action plan going forward. There are only so many “Admiral” nurses, for instance, in the country and the network is limited. On that basis, will the Minister make sure that dementia and the care for dementia patients over the medium term is taken into account in this carer’s action plan, because it is an increasingly pressing problem locally up and down the country?
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Lab)
Indeed; the noble Lord raises a really important point. As I am sure he is aware, we have committed to the announcement of a dementia tsar starting in December. The joy of the unpaid carers champion role is that it enables us to ensure the weaving in of all these important threads—because unpaid caring is such a diverse role—so that nobody is neglected or left behind, and every carer feels seen and is able to navigate what can be quite a fragmented system.
Hormone Replacement Therapy: Product Shortage
Cyber Security: PHP Vulnerability
Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill
Thursday 22nd October 2026
(1 day, 14 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill 2026-27 View all Church Appointments (Repeal of Discriminatory Provision) Bill 2026-27 Debates Read Hansard Text