Question to the Leader of the House:

To ask the Leader of the House, if he will make an assessment of the adequacy of Departmental answers to written Parliamentary Questions where information is refused because a document is not already in the public domain.

Answered by Alan Campbell - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons

As set out in the Ministerial Code, Ministers "should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest".

I have written to all Members of Cabinet and spoken with Departmental Parliamentary Clerks and Permanent Secretaries to remind departments and Ministers about the importance of providing full and helpful responses to Written Parliamentary Questions (WPQs).

In addition, the House of Commons Procedure Committee is currently undertaking an inquiry into WPQs, and I look forward to working with the Committee as this work progresses.

Question to the Leader of the House:

To ask the Leader of the House, whether he plans to introduce a ban on second jobs for hon. Members.

Answered by Alan Campbell - Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons

As outlined in our manifesto, the Government is committed to the principle that second jobs for Members of Parliament should be banned outside of very limited exceptions, such as maintaining professional qualifications.

The Committee on Standards is currently undertaking an inquiry into MPs’ employment and outside interests, and I look forward to working with the Committee as this work progresses.

I want MPs held fully accountable for lying or misleading the public in any context - on social media, in interviews, speeches, or Parliament. Each lie could incur a fine, be logged in a public register, and if an MP accumulates three lies, a by-election could be triggered to protect democracy.

We want the House of Commons to adopt rules to restrict MPs from using mobile phones and tablets during formal parliamentary proceedings. Clear guidance and appropriate sanctions should ensure compliance and maintain professional standards.

Found: Letter from Lord Strathclyde, Chair of the Constitution Committee to Baroness Smith of Basildon, Leader of the House

Found: Correspondence from the Leader of the House regarding the Modernisation Committee inquiry dated 11 March

Found: Some of those matters will be for the Leader of the House rather than the Cabinet Office.

Question

To ask The Leader of the House what plans they have to allow parliamentary time for a debate on the report on the use of copyright works in the development of AI systems and the economic impact assessment, required respectively by sections 136 and 135 of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, in the current parliamentary session.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Basildon - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal

The Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport and the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology wrote to all Peers on 18 March, outlining the Government's approach to the issue of AI and copyright. The report and impact assessment required under the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 were published and laid before Parliament on the same date, fulfilling the statutory requirements. There are no plans to schedule a debate in the current parliamentary session.

Question

To ask The Leader of the House what mechanisms there are, if any, to ensure that Parliament is formally notified when legislation proceeds under the urgent measures process before independent regulatory scrutiny, including by the Regulatory Policy Committee, has concluded.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Basildon - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal

Parliament is not formally notified when legislation proceeds under the urgent measures process. However, paragraphs 6.12 and 6.13 in the Better Regulation Framework outlines the process for urgent measures. Under this process, “it is still expected that the required analysis of impacts is presented to Parliament alongside the legislation or, where that is not possible, as soon as practical thereafter”. In regards to scrutiny by the Regulatory Policy Committee this should also be published to accompany the final Impact Assessment.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to remove peers from the House of Lords due to misconduct.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

The House of Lords (Expulsion and Suspension) Act 2015 provides the House of Lords with the power to expel members who are found to have breached the Code of Conduct.

The Government has announced it will introduce legislation to create a mechanism to remove peerages from disgraced peers. The Leader of the House of Lords has also asked the House of Lords Conduct Committee to consider what changes are required to the Code of Conduct to ensure peers can be removed when they have brought the House into disrepute.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government in light of recent disclosures arising from the release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein, whether they will review the transparency arrangements that apply when individuals undertake official duties on behalf of the Government without being Ministers or civil servants; and whether they will consider introducing a publicly accessible register of relevant interests in such circumstances.

Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies sets out the personal and professional standards expected from non-executive board members of UK public bodies, including the transparency arrangements that apply in relation to conflicts of interest.

Separately, as the Leader of the House of Lords set out in her statement to the House on 10 February, the government will look closely at our system for providing transparency around lobbying, and will continue to update the House on this matter.

Question

To ask The Leader of the House, further to her Written Answer on 9 February (HL13919), what discussions she has had with the Cabinet Office on the failure to answer expeditiously the Written Question asked by Lord Jackson of Peterborough on 3 December 2025 (HL12630).

Answered by Baroness Smith of Basildon - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal

My office has kept in close contact with the Cabinet Office regarding the written question HL12630, the question was answered on Monday 9th March. I apologise for the delay in response.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Chapman of Darlington on 14 October 2025 (HL10633), what assessment they have made of whether there are lessons to learn from their decision not to require Lord Mandelson to divest himself of his shares in Global Counsel while serving as Ambassador to the United States, and if not, why not.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

I refer the Noble Lord to the Government's response to the Urgent Question tabled in the House of Commons on 12 February (Hansard, Volume 780, Column 923), the Written Ministerial Statement in the name of the Leader of the House of Lords that same day, and the Oral Statement in the House of Commons on 23 February (Hansard, Volume 781, Column 41) which set out an update on the Government's process. We will set out further details in due course. The Government wishes to ensure that Parliament's instruction is met with the urgency and transparency that it deserves.

Question

To ask The Leader of the House how many House of Lords Select Committee reports have not been responded to by His Majesty’s Government within the recommended time since September 2024.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Basildon - Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal

Since September 2024 there have been 29 House of Lords Select Committee Reports which have not been responded to by His Majesty’s Government within the recommended time. This does not include responses to Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, Constitution Committee or Joint Committee on Human Rights reports as they are usually published in time for particular stages of bills rather than the usual two month period. My office regularly follows up with departments who fail to meet the recommended response period.

Found: Leader of the House of Lords, Baroness Smith said: The Lords plays avital role within our bicameral