Lords Chamber

Wednesday 28th January 2026

(began 1 hour, 57 minutes ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
15:06
None Portrait Oral questions: Plan to review the funding of the Music and Dance Scheme to ensure schools can continue to support talented children from families with lower incomes
-

My My Lord My Lord Frost My Lord Frost Oral My Lord Frost Oral Question Baroness Keeley. >> I beg leave to ask the question.
15:06
15:07
15:08
15:08
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:15
15:16
15:16
15:17
15:17
15:18
15:19
15:20
15:20
15:21
15:22
15:23
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:26
15:27
15:28
15:28
None Portrait Oral questions: Evaluation of sustainable water management solutions to address flooding events and protracted droughts in Yorkshire
-

Oral Question, the Lord Bishop of Sheffield. My Lords, I beg leave to ask the question. Standing in my name on the Order Paper.
15:28
15:29
15:30
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:33
15:33
15:34
15:35
15:35
15:35
15:36
15:36
15:36
15:37
15:38
15:38
None Portrait Oral questions: Assessment of the likely timescale and costs for the establishment of the National Police Service recently announced by the Home Secretary
-

Fourth Oral Question Lord McCabe.
15:38
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:41
15:41
15:42
15:42
15:43
15:43
15:44
15:45
15:45
15:46
15:47
15:47
15:48
15:48
15:49
Lord Hanson of Flint Portrait Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)
-
-
When I was last police Minister in 2009 ten, I rejected the proposal to privatise forensic science services and I'm pleased I did so. The then conservative government privatised forensic sciences, and it has not been the level of service that I would wish to see in the future. In the strategic plan we've got now, we intend to bring forensic sciences under the remit of the National Policing Service. We look at the organisation of that and how it works. But I'm of the view the forensic science is key to fighting crime.

It needs to be dealt with nationally and it needs to be under strong policing and political

**** Possible New Speaker ****

management from the centre here. Message from the Commons that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Message from the Commons that they have passed the Medical Training Prioritisation Bill to which they desire the agreement of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

which they desire the agreement of your Lordships. My Lords Medical Training

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords Medical Training privatisation Bill, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a first time. The question is that this.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this. Bill be now read a first time. As many as the other opinion will say content the contrary not

**** Possible New Speaker ****

content. The contents have it. My Lords, we've. Concluded oral questions for

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Concluded oral questions for today. Before we move to the Report stage, we'll take a few moments for those who wish to leave the chamber
15:52
15:52
Lord Bird Portrait Lord Bird (Crossbench)
-
-
107 Lord Bird. >> I beg to rise to speak on my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg to rise to speak on my amendment 107. I'm very.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Pleased that this amendment is going to be discussed again.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

going to be discussed again. What troubles me is it's such a

**** Possible New Speaker ****

What troubles me is it's such a small and it could be insignificant small and it could be insignificant to ask for a to ask for targets from the government is targets our targets, a part of the armoury that we use to get rid of poverty. Because if we are endeavouring to get rid of poverty, then we'll need more than targets. We will need houses, we will need training for parents so that they don't pass poverty down to the next generation.

We will need a government that will converge and coordinate all of the efforts into some form, so that they can say that they are disentangling the situation at the moment, where you have eight government departments dealing with poverty, I imagine that if we didn't have a ministry of defence and if people decided to attack this country, we would form a ministry of defence and bring everything together and not leave it to a different ministries, the same as with poverty.

Poverty is destroying us. Poverty is stopping schools from delivering on schooling. 30% of the time that teachers take are spent on the problems that are caused when poverty enters the classroom, our our health service. 50% of people who suffer from. What is it? Sorry. Cardiological cardiological. Whatever you call it, forgive me. Whatever you call it, forgive me. I've got new teeth. But the thing is, 50% of those people are suffering from food poverty.

I have used this bill. Sorry. I've used this amendment in order to raise not just the question of targets, but the government should use targets. It should have others measuring its homework rather than itself. What I have heard from the government about targets is that if you have targets, then you tend to have people massaging the figures to make it look as though the targets are being achieved, and that in fact, if you have targets, you then go after the low hanging fruit because the hardest to reach, you don't get anywhere near them because you can achieve your targets by concentrating on the fact that it's easier to help people who are the low hanging fruits.

But overall, my big question is, is targets something that could fit in a whole panoply of organised convergent energy that is used to get rid of poverty. So I'm not really here today just to talk about this amendment, but to talk about the fact that every government I know has had all sorts of initiatives to get rid of poverty, but we never see the end of poverty, 400 million for half, 4.5 million people, children caught in poverty.

And that is a tremendous indictment, not of this government, not of the last government, not even the government before that. It's the indictment of the methodology, because it's an inherited methodology. It gets passed down. Every generation of government passes down and takes the same form as other governments. And I would say, please, let's look at targets. Let's be honest about targets. But let's also begin as a society and as a chamber, to look at the idea that we follow my example and put a lot of work into the idea of having a ministry of Poverty prevention and cure, because the problem is 90% of all the money that is spent on poverty is spent on the emergency of poverty.

You cannot put all your energy into the emergency of poverty. You have to try and have cure, and you have to try and have prevention. Anyway, I'm going to end there because I haven't got an awful lot to say about targets. I've said everything. It's all in Hansard. I would love you all to consider that the government should at least allow us our targets, and then we can look at all the other things that we need over the coming months and years, all the other things where we converge and concatenate.

As I've said before, the energies necessary to get rid of poverty. I inherited poverty, and that makes me a fierce warrior to end the the inheritance of poverty. I started from behind. Most of the people who live in poverty live in poverty, and they never get to the starting line. We can't all be Boris Johnson. Thank you. I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment proposed after clause 27. Insert the new clause as

**** Possible New Speaker ****

27. Insert the new clause as printed on the Marshalled List. Please speak in support of the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment. Moved by. Such a warrior. Against poverty. To which. I've added my.
15:59
Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour)
-
-
>> I've added my. >> Name, not least as it provides. >> An opportunity to welcome. >> The government's landmark child.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The government's landmark child. Poverty strategy. Sadly, the opposition did not think it important enough to ask for a statement on it to be repeated in your Lordships House. I welcome to the strategies accompanying monitoring and evaluation framework, supported by a theory of change based on clear measures and what it calls a wide range ranging evidence base. This includes hearing directly from children, young people and families who have lived experience of poverty, building on the strong engagement with them during the strategy's development.

But what is missing is any yardstick against which stakeholders of all kinds and parliamentarians can judge the success of the strategy using the measures outlined. And this is where this amendment comes in. So I'm grateful to the noble Lord, Lord bird, and a big issue for continuing to press this, an evaluation strategy without a yardstick, targets and milestones is like putting on hamlet without the Prince. Looking back at the evidence submitted to the Child Poverty Task Force, a common theme was the need for statutory targets.

For instance, the first of eight tests set by child poverty, a coalition of over 120 organisations, was that the strategy must put in place legally binding, independently evaluated targets that build clear milestones. Similarly, for practitioners with a range of expertise and interviewed by the Child Poverty Action Group, of which I am Honorary President, were unanimous that the forthcoming strategy must publicly set targets to reduce child poverty. And just this week, the Unicef UK CEO has written that achieving the national mission to give every child the best start in life must mean a visible target for driving down child poverty.

In committee, my noble friend, the Minister made two main arguments against the inclusion of statutory targets. The first was that statute targets would not in themselves drive reductions in poverty and can be reversed. More important is the nature of the government at the time, she said. Now, I agree with her up to a point, and I don't think as the noble Lord, Lord bird has made clear, I don't think anyone argues, that targets on their own will reduce poverty. And of course, their effectiveness depends on the government of the day taking them seriously.

But it's generally believed that the existence of targets in Scotland has galvanised action there. And as I remember it, there was a time under the last Labour government when they started to lose momentum in reducing child poverty, and civil society were able to use the targets to exert the pressure that resulted them putting their feet back on the pedal. Moreover, fears of what a future government might do has not stopped the government from setting clear targets targets in their homelessness strategy.

Her other main argument was that targets risk adversely, narrowing the focus of effort to moving the children closest to the poverty line over it. Now, this is suspiciously like the argument put by the Cameron government to justify targets abolition. So I guess it's been dusted down again in Whitehall. As I made clear in committee, I disagree with it. Indeed, arguably every time the government justifiably points with pride to the big reduction in child poverty that abolition of the two child limit will affect is implicitly accepting the importance of reducing the numbers below that poverty line.

Moreover, I'm pleased that the revised amendment includes a target for reduction in deep poverty, which will help to ensure that any targets focus is not purely on moving children over the poverty line. Of course, my Lords targets can be reversed by a government of a different political persuasion, as we saw with the abolition of the Child Poverty Act 2010, in 2016. But so can any measures taken by the government, including as the opposition, have made clear, abolition of the heinous, heinous two child limit? Surely that's not an argument for the government not doing the right thing.

Statutory targets are a way of demonstrating to the electorate this government's intent and its belief in its own strategy, a refusal to accept clear targets could be interpreted as a lack of belief and as a lack of commitment to accountability. That said, in the spirit of compromise, I would concede that non-statutory targets would be better than no targets at all. I would therefore propose that, at the very least, the baseline report promised for the summer should include the kind of aspirational yet achievable targets and milestones called for by civil society and academics.

Without this acclaim for an ambitious poverty strategy won't carry the force that they deserve. While she not, she may not be able to commit the government to this, to this today, would my noble friend undertake to take this proposal back to the child poverty team responsible for drawing up the baseline report? And in fact, I just the other day received a letter from the Work and Pensions Secretary, which does, with reference to the baseline report, refer to the development of milestones.

So could my noble friend say more about this, or if not, perhaps report back to the House at Third Reading? I think a clear commitment to at least non-statutory targets and milestones would do much to strengthen the strategy's credibility with stakeholders.
16:05
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Portrait Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
It's a very great pleasure to follow the powerful and important follow the powerful and important speech from the noble Lady Baroness Lister and the equally important speech from the noble Lord, Lord speech from the noble Lord, Lord bird. I signed the similar amendment to this at committee, but I left the space here, and the hope against hope that a party less likely than mine would have signed up to it. And so we might have got a broader spread of support being shown.

That didn't happen. But anyway, I want to briefly, I think the point the noble Lady Baroness Lister made about a yardstick, and perhaps because I've been out campaigning on the doorstep this morning, I was thinking about an additional argument that hasn't yet been made in committee or here. This would really be a help for voters. You think about a government that starts out and it sets the targets. And then as you get to the end of the of the parliament, the next election, voters would have a very clear have they met their targets, have they done what they achieved? And what it would also do is put great pressure on all parties competing in the next election to say what is going to be your target.

You're elected to be the government. What is going to be your child poverty reduction target? And that would be something that would be really useful and clear and obvious to voters. Now, I think we've got to just acknowledge where we are now. We've already heard quite a bit about child poverty, but we've got to refer, I think, to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation's analysis of the OBR figures that says the headline poverty rate between 2026 and 2029 is going to stay essentially the same, and the poorest are getting poorer.

Noble Lady Baroness Lister referred to the addition of deep poverty to this amendment. 6.8 million people across these islands are in deep poverty. That's the highest level on record, and it's hardened. That is a technical term. I've just learned the average person in poverty is now 29% below the poverty line. That was 23% in the mid 1990s. Now, one of the obvious things that would address this target and make a big difference is abolishing the benefit cap. The overall benefit cap.

I fully applaud the government's action on the two child cap, but the overall benefit cap would immediately list 300,000 children out of poverty. You would be able to see progress towards a positive target. And just finally, as the noble Lady Baroness Lister led said, I'm going to reflect on Scotland and it does show what the impact of targets have with the Scottish Child Payment, the lowest rate of child poverty on these islands is in Scotland. Still not great. Still should be much better, but 23% that compares to 31% in England and Wales and 24% in Northern Ireland.

Setting targets focuses minds and enables voters to make judgements. OK.
16:08
Lord Mohammed of Tinsley Portrait Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My Lords. I also rise to speak in support of amendment 107, moved by our noble friend Lord Bird, and I like to follow the powerful speeches made by both Baroness Lister and Baroness Bennett. This amendment is extremely timely. It supports our children, particularly those most in need. As we heard earlier, the Joseph Rowntree analysis on Child Poverty in Britain has said that 4.5 billion children are living in poverty, figures that continue to climb even after the most recent policy changes.

My Lords, these aren't abstract numbers. They are lived realities of millions of families denied the security and the opportunity every child deserves. And this amendment before us would is just goes beyond rhetoric. It would require the government to set binding targets which with clear timescales and to account publicly for each step taken towards meeting these. And I say this, my Lords, in doing so it will only emulate principles behind other statutory frameworks. Most obvious is the Climate Change Act, where parliamentary accountability has driven sustained action and cross-government focus, an issue that Lord Bird talked about in terms of eight separate departments having some sort of responsibility for child poverty.

That rigour should be applied to the fight against child poverty. Peer reviewed evidence makes clear why this matters. International literature also shows poverty has long term impacts on children's health, education attainment, future incomes. Children in low income families are most likely to suffer poor health, lower social school attainment, diminished life opportunities than their better off peers. Moreover, robust reviews find that increased family income improves children's educational and health outcomes, including family performance and future prospects. And I don't speak here, my Lords, as just reviewing literature.

I speak before you with my own lived experiences. As someone who was on school. Free school meals did get subsidised school clothing and actually couldn't afford to go to college simply because we were poor and had to go and work on a training scheme in 1988 for £27.50, working 40 hours a week unloading lorries. So these are our lived experiences, my Lord, that we bring before you today. The evidence reminds us also that policy choices matter profoundly for children's life chances and systematic measurement and accountability mechanisms are essential to gauge impact.

The government's recent published Child Poverty Strategy, mentioned earlier, focuses that its current suite of measures could lift an estimated 550,000 children out of relative poverty, and it's something that we should all aim for. But what I say is, without legal, enforced, enforceable targets, there is no guarantee that those outcomes will be delivered, my Lords, and sustained across future administrations. Targets give shape to ambition to transform good intentions into measurable progress. We would also heed lessons from within the UK and I think Scotland was mentioned earlier.

Scottish poverty targets might not be perfect, my Lords, but they have guided sustained policy focus and shown that what can outcomes are measured and monitored and progress more achievable. This amendment, my Lords, is a practical tool to ensure that Ministers cannot evade responsibility for promises they have made. It is a mechanism that will help ensure that every policy aimed at education, wellbeing, housing and family support is tested against the yardstick of whether it moves us closer to the Houston child poverty.

I therefore urge noble Lords from all sides of this House to support this amendment and help ensure that the government is held accountable to the children of our great nation. Thank you.
16:12
16:14
16:15
Lord Crisp Portrait Lord Crisp (Crossbench)
-
-
Lords, it gives me great pleasure to follow so many so powerful speeches and support my powerful speeches and support my noble friend Lord bird's amendment here. I have to say that as a former chief executive of the English NHS, I know a thing or two about targets and there are some awful targets and some good ones, and I am delighted that the noble Lord Lord Barber is in his place. As the government's developed deliveries are, or whatever the right title was in those days.

Can I just say just 2 or 3 things? The first thing that the noble Lord, Lord, Lord bird said was it's very clear that targets are only part of a policy, but there's a real issue here, and not just in poverty about obesity and all other things like that, which cut across different departments for how we're going to tackle them. And I do think these cross-cutting government targets are a good thing. They also targets can galvanise. I think that was the point that the noble Lady Baroness Lister already made.

And I also think that actually there need to be clear, they need to be measurable. And I think the basic targets here are measured anyway that these figures are available. We're clear what it means by deep poverty. We're clear what it means by living in poverty. Those definitions are out there and have been out there. And you can get on and you can understand it. So I think at a high level, these could actually be very useful in just pressing forward. And the government, if it believes that this is what it wants to do, ought to put some measurement in place, as other noble Lords have said.
16:16
Lord Storey Portrait Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My Lords, of course, Lord Bird is a a warrior. >> Passionate advocate. For the unemployed and the poor. I have a slightly different take on this. slightly different take on this. Yes, targets are important and yes, strategies are important, but how often do we say, oh, we'll sort this issue out by establishing targets. We'll sort this issue out by establishing strategies. Actually, what's important is doing something. It's no good just agreeing a target or agreeing a strategy. It's actually doing things, having policies which make a real difference, carrying out actions which make a real difference.

I am quite ashamed that we live in a society. What the fifth or sixth richest country in the world. And yet only the other day the LGU published information which said that teachers are even with breakfast clubs and free school meals. Teachers are increasingly feeding and clothing their pupils when they come to school, the fifth or sixth richest country in the world and were doing that. I am ashamed that we've got a million young people not in a job, not in employment or not in training.

That can't be right in the fifth or sixth richest country in the world. So it's actions that we need to take. I congratulate the government on doing away with the two child benefit cap, and that will make that is an action which will make a huge difference. Some of the other policies which governments quite rightly trot out are introducing breakfast clubs. Oh, we're going to do this on clothing. Yes, they're important, but they're not the big things that will make a difference to child children's poverty.

It's also frightening in the fifth or sixth richest country in the world, to realise that 21% of adults live in poverty, 21% of adults live in poverty. So it has to be. I hate using the word, but I will do it. It has to be a holistic approach. So it's about making sure people have jobs. If you have a job, a well-paid job, a proper job, then that helps your family. It helps your children. If you have a decent house, not with mould or damp or whatever it is that helps your child, it helps your family, it helps your self-esteem.

And if you have decent schools, as this bill is trying to build on the work of the previous government, then that is life changing as well. So let's see actions, not more targets, not more strategy, but actually something happening. My Lords.
16:19
Earl of Effingham Portrait The Earl of Effingham (Conservative)
-
-
Please let me thank all noble Lords for their valuable contributions to this debate, but particularly the noble Lord, Lord bird, for his relentless focus on tackling poverty through both the Big Issue and Big Issue. Invest. Investing in social enterprises, social purpose businesses and charities trying to end poverty and reduce inequality in the UK. Your Lordships House is united in its determination to to address child poverty and the range of complex issues that drive it, and whilst we fully recognise the firm intent behind this amendment, His Majesty's Loyal Opposition retains a number of reservations which we shared at Committee stage of the Bill.

We unequivocally, unequivocally hold a desire to reduce child poverty, but the issue is deeply complex. We do have concerns that legally binding targets determined by central government risk, overlooking the local and regional variances in both the causality and the experiences of child poverty. As the noble Baroness, Lady Barran highlighted in committee, the pursuit of targets can often shift the focus onto particular statistics rather than people's lived experiences. Central governments must be able to adapt to ever developing needs and realities.

In addition to enabling local authorities and organisations who are often better placed themselves to understand these esoteric local challenges, to act accordingly, we therefore welcome and seeing the details of the government's child poverty strategy when it is published in the autumn, including new monitoring and evaluation arrangements to track progress which, with the right strategy for delivery, should yield results. We once again thank the noble Lord, Lord bird, for his dedication to this vital issue. And whilst we are not able to support the amendment directly, we strongly welcome the intentions behind it.
16:22
Baroness Smith of Malvern Portrait Baroness Smith of Malvern, Minister of State (Minister for Women and Equalities) (Labour)
-
-
Yes. >> Yes. >> My Lords, turning to amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, turning to amendment 107, in the name of the noble Lord, Lord bird, as we've heard, which concerns placing a duty on the concerns placing a duty on the Secretary of State to set legally binding child poverty reduction targets. I just want to start by agreeing with other noble Lords that it is clear here that we have a shared objective to tackle child poverty, and I thank the noble Lord, Lord bird, for his commitment, for the campaigning that he does, as well as the engagement with the government on child poverty.

And we had, I thought, a very good meeting where we talked both about the work of the Big issue and rightful challenge to government to ensure both that the structure within government and the measurement of our objectives meet the challenge that has been set here. And I will talk about how we will ensure that that happens. I am proud that this government has now published our child poverty strategy, going far beyond rhetoric, as one noble Lord suggested we should do.

But I have to say, I don't agree with those who've argued that all governments are the same. All the suggestion that the strategy lacks credibility. Several noble Lords have quoted the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, and I have to say, in their annual poverty report published yesterday, they say that the child poverty strategy is hugely welcome, particularly after the last government made no progress in reducing poverty and they welcome the child poverty strategy, delivering the projected biggest reduction in child poverty in a single parliament.

Because we have been clear in the wide ranging child poverty strategy that we have produced, that it will see the largest reduction in child poverty by any government in a single parliament, lifting 550,000 children out of poverty, principally through the expansion of free school meals and removing the two child limit. Both things that this government has already done to take up the challenge set by the noble Lord Lord story. But of course we need to both measure and demonstrate progress being made on this strategy.

I. I completely take on board that challenge. And that's why, alongside the strategy, the Monitoring and Evaluation framework, which was published alongside the strategy, set out that a baseline report will be published in the summer in summer 2026, with annual reporting on progress thereafter. It will be quite clear what progress the government is making in a range of areas. It will be possible to hold this government to account for delivering on this crucial strategy and on our objectives.

And I can say to the noble Baroness, Lady Bennett, it will be very clear to voters as well that this government will make progress as the last Labour government did in tackling the scourge of child poverty. We recognise, my Lords, that our approach to monitoring and evaluation will need to evolve and adapt as the strategy must, reflecting the dynamic nature of poverty and the broader social and economic factors that influence it. And here I, whilst I understand the very powerful point made by the noble Lord Lord Birt about the government machinery for ensuring progress, I think it's actually a strength of the cross of the child poverty strategy, that it is explicitly cross-government.

It recognises that it will take action. It will need action in a whole range of different areas to tackle child poverty. But I take his point as well, that there needs to be a central directing part of government, and that's why we've committed to maintain a child poverty team with cross-government oversight by Ministers. These clear reporting arrangements and the focus on child poverty within government shows our commitment and leadership and will ensure that the progress that we make is transparent for all.

We will continue to work closely with the whole sector committed to tackling child poverty, as we have done in developing the strategy, and we believe that this is the best approach, rather than introducing statutory targets. For these reasons, I hope I have provided some assurance, both about the commitment of this government, the
Feed Live - Click to view video
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page