Lords Chamber

Thursday 18th June 2026

(began 2 weeks, 4 days ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
11:09
None Portrait Introduction(s): Baroness Grainger
-

Charles III, Charles III, by Charles III, by the Charles III, by the grace Charles III, by the grace of Charles III, by the grace of God Charles III, by the grace of God of the United Kingdom, of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and of her other realms and territories. King, head of the Commonwealth. Defender of the faith to all Lords, spiritual and temporal, and to all other. Our subjects, whatsoever to whom these presents shall come. Greeting. Know ye that we. Of our special grace, certain knowledge and mere motion, in pursuance of the Life Peerages Act, 1958, and of all other powers in that behalf us enabling do by these presents advance, create and prefer our trusty and well-beloved Dame Catherine Jane Granger, dame commander of our most excellent order of the British Empire, to the state degree, style, dignity, title and honour of Baroness Grainger of Garelochhead in our County of Dunbartonshire, and for us our heirs and successors do appoint, give and grant unto her the said name, state, degree, style, dignity, title and honour of Baroness Grainger to have and to hold unto her for her life.

Willing, and by these presents granting for us our heirs and successors, that she may have hold and possess a seat, place and voice in the Parliaments and public Assemblies and councils of us, our heirs and successors within our United Kingdom, amongst the Barons, and also that she may enjoy and use all the rights, privileges, preeminences, immunities, and advantages to the degree of a Baron duly and of right belonging, which Barons of our United Kingdom have heretofore used and enjoyed, or as they do at present, use and enjoy in witness whereof we have caused these our letters to be made patent.

Witness ourself at Westminster, the 20th day of April, in the fourth year of our reign, by warrant under year of our reign, by warrant under

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the King's sign-manual. I, Catherine Baroness Grainger,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I, Catherine Baroness Grainger, do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty. King allegiance to His Majesty. King Charles, his heirs and successors

**** Possible New Speaker ****

First First Oral First Oral Question

**** Possible New Speaker ****

First Oral Question First Oral Question Lord First Oral Question Lord Dodds of Duncairn. I beg leave to ask the question

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the Order Paper. And in so doing, I'm sure the whole house will want to join the whole house will want to join in wishing Garter King of Arms as being his last introduction. A very

**** Possible New Speaker ****

happy retirement in every best wish. Hear, hear. Hear. The government is committed to
11:14
11:14
11:15
11:16
11:17
11:17
11:17
11:18
11:18
11:19
11:20
11:20
11:21
11:21
11:22
11:22
11:23
11:24
11:25
11:25
11:26
11:26
11:27
11:27
11:28
11:28
11:29
11:29
11:30
11:30
11:31
11:32
11:32
11:33
11:33
11:34
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:37
11:37
11:38
11:39
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:43
11:44
11:45
11:46
11:47
11:48
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:51
11:52
11:52
11:53
11:54
11:56
11:56
11:57
11:58
11:59
12:00
12:01
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:04
12:05
12:05
12:06
12:06
12:07
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon Portrait Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Labour)
-
-
Motion for debate. Jo Cox. Civility Commission. Baroness Civility Commission. Baroness Royall of Blaisdon. My Lords, like many in this House, I have the privilege of knowing Joe ten years on from that devastating loss. I want first to pay my respects and send my condolences to her remarkable family, who have shown such strength and courage. We know that this week will be particularly challenging for them. Joe was petite in stature, but she was a giant in so many ways. She had a remarkable zest for life.

She was a catalyst for action in her constituency and in the wider world, where she worked in international development, in which she witnessed first hand the impact of conflict and inequality. She was a courageous campaigner against injustice and bigotry in this country and the wider world. She was a feminist, a humanitarian who loved her fellow human human beings. She believed in service. Most importantly, she was a mother, a daughter, a sister, a wife, and she was a fantastic friend to many.

Joe inspired love and hope, and it was for that reason. Following her appalling murder, there was an outpouring of love as well as grief. Joe's murder was an act driven by extremism and division, but people responded not with fear, but with something that Joe believed in connection. And in December of that year, friends and family set up the Jo Cox Foundation to pursue the issues about which Joe was passionate, guided by her values and her principles. It's an immense honour to serve as chair of the Jo Cox Foundation.

Our vision is. As for a society underpinned by her enduring belief that we have far more in common than that which divides us one where our communities and our democracy are strengthened by connection and respect across difference, with decency and civility in public life. A decade on, our work is more important than ever. Sadly, despite the collective promises made ten years ago to address hate, foster unity and bridge divisions, our society is more fractured and communities more divided. Loneliness remains a profound, profound public health crisis, and the abuse and intimidation of elected representatives has intensified.

This ten year mark is not only a moment for remembrance, it is a call to action. Social connection is not just a nice to have. It's a bedrock of a safe, resilient society. And it's fundamental to the healthy functioning of our democracy. The good news, the heartening news is that desire to connect is fiercely alive. New research by the Jo Cox Foundation, in partnership with More in Common UK, shows that while many feel community ties have weakened, 1 in 3 people actively want to improve their connection to those around them.

Crucially, those who are currently the least connected are the ones who want to connect the most. The issues, the issue lies in the systemic barriers to that connection financial hardship, anxiety amongst young people, online interactions, replacing real life communities, and deepening political polarisation. So we must act. We have a duty to act. We urgently need to bring people together, wherever possible, in person, to support our young people, to access the places, relationships and opportunities to belong, to give communities the resources and power to take forward community led social action themselves, and to remove the barriers to connection, whether that be creating accessible and affordable places to connect a more intentionally addressing loneliness.

By adopting our joint Call to Action for a new cross-government action plan on loneliness and connection, Joe was dedicated to combating loneliness and formed an independent cross-party commission of MPs and charities. This led to the appointment of the First Minister for loneliness, Dame Tracey Crouch, who I'm delighted to say is now on our board and I pay tribute to the noble Baroness Baroness May for having implemented that, for having drawn Tracey into the government. As we're all aware, we now have an epidemic of loneliness, especially among young people with a profound impact on individuals, on society, on the NHS and on productivity.

When lonely people are isolated in their rooms, they're sometimes prey to social media algorithms that exacerbate divisions and can lead to violence, sometimes political abuse and aggression. Understanding the importance of meaningful social connection together with other members of the Loneliness Policy Action Group, we have launched a cross-government call to action, a set of policy calls aimed at embedding loneliness, prevention and connection more deeply across government policy and public services. I warmly welcome the government's report, published earlier this week on loneliness, isolation and social connection among boys and young men in England.

But I would be grateful if my noble friend the Minister, would agree to meet with me and my colleagues to to discuss much needed cross-government action. I do not suggest that the recent horrendous murders in Southampton and Belfast were the result of loneliness, but I have no doubt that the violence that ensued was whipped up by social media on toxic in toxic online spaces, by algorithms, by anger, by division. In our fractured societies, fear of the other was weaponised. Yet there are extraordinary examples of generosity and words and deeds.

Like the father of Henry Novak and those who gave shelter, those in fear from racist thugs in Belfast. There's much work to be done to bring people together, to break down barriers, to nurture understanding and heal divides, to enable people to listen, to talk to each other, to disagree agreeably. Polarisation in our politics adds to the ferment. Politics faces a crisis of connection, confidence and safety. Both Joe and Sir David Amess were murdered by extremists while carrying out their democratic duty in their constituencies.

Since then, abuse and intimidation of elected representatives and candidates have intensified. The political atmosphere is becoming increasingly hostile. Reported crimes against MPs have more than doubled since 2019. 96% have experienced threatening behaviour, with threats of sexual violence disproportionately targeted women. Minority and disabled MPs. In a question for short debate. Two weeks ago, we heard of the intolerable abuse suffered by counsellors both online and in person. Our political system is under attack. Our democracy is being undermined.

The pressures will fall disproportionately on women and those already underrepresented in our democracy. The very people whose participation makes our institutions more representative and more resilient. This risks a reversal of progress on political diversity. A Girlguiding survey found that a third of girls and young women are deterred from pursuing careers in politics because of the hostility that high profile women face online. We're moving towards a culture where abuse is dismissed as part of the job. It is not, and we must reject the growing normalisation of abuse and intimidation.

This is a systemic problem rooted in wider inequalities and pressures around the political ecosystem. This is a direct threat to our democracy. Talented people are stepping down, not standing in the first place, and self-censoring. We need an inclusive democracy, one in which people feel safe and confident to participate in robust but respectful debate. Freedom of speech is the cornerstone of our democracy, but it must never be used to incite violence, spread hatred or justify harassment. Language matters, and we must ensure that we never return to the toxic public discourse that we endured during the Brexit debate.

We must not allow our country to be dominated by extreme voices. We must deplore the racist voices and policies of restore, which is backed by Elon Musk, and would welcome Tommy Robinson as a member. We must choose hope over hate. The Jo Cox Civility Commission has successfully advocated for improvements, for example, expanded police support and security coordination for elected representatives, making security costs exempt from election spending limits, ending the requirements for councillors to publish their addresses on council websites.

Improving specific guidance for families of MPs. It is outrageous that families of MPs and councillors are targeted and subjected to abuse, but we must go further. We call for further change, including for political parties to enforce higher standards of conduct, for social media companies to make their platforms safer and for improved media, digital and political literacy for all ages. I want to end on a positive note. A note of hope for every act of division. There are hundreds of acts of connection and community up and down the four nations.

We see this every year during the Great Get Together, which will take place this weekend. Thousands of people across the country reject division and step out of their comfort zones to get together with friends, neighbours, people with whom they've never met before in parks, picnics, community halls and gardens to eat, drink, bake, sing, run or merely sit in the sun and talk over a cup of tea. It's the living embodiment of Jo's belief that we have more in common than that which divides us.

I thank the many friends in this House who have engaged, and who continue to engage with the important work of the Jo Cox Foundation. It is a responsibility of every one of us to foster community and connection, and to build a more respectful political culture. We should be guided by Jo's words, but rather than repeating them, we should act on them. Here is that this motion be agreed to.
12:17
Lord Bates Portrait Lord Bates (Conservative)
-
-
It's an honour to follow Baroness Royall and her introduction of this important and timely debate. I agree with everything that she has said, and I congratulate her for her work as chair of the Jo Cox Foundation and for this report, which I wholeheartedly support as well. Jo's core belief, as we've been told, was that we had more in common than what divides us. This is an important challenge because often we emphasise our different identities and forget to celebrate what we have in common.

Our British identity obsess about the relatively small number of things that go wrong, and forget to celebrate the millions of things that go right across our country every day. It's like the players and fans leaving the England game in Dallas last night and demanding an independent inquiry into who was to blame for Croatia's two goals, and forgetting to mention that we scored four and won the game comfortably. So Jo's sister, Kim Leadbeater MP, said yesterday we've got to make sure the voices of positivity and perseverance and resilience are the ones that are amplified.

I agree. We call ourselves a United Kingdom, but united isn't just an adjective, it's a verb too. So I would like to use my time to remind ourselves of the amazing things this country, which we are privileged to call home, has done and is doing. We have given the world its most widely spoken language with 2.3 billion speakers. It's a language of the internet of international trade and of navigation. William Shakespeare perfected in the language into the greatest literary work of all time.

We are the mother of parliaments. We are surrounded here by statues of those who witnessed the signing of the Magna Carta, which established basic human rights and set limits on government. English contract law is the basis of international trade. Even time is measured from the Greenwich meridian, which is established longitude as well, which opened up the oceans for navigation. We are home to the first Industrial Revolution, birthplace of the railways, where a G7 nation, a permanent member of the UN Security Council.

We play a leading role in the Commonwealth, where a nuclear power. A cornerstone of the NATO alliance. The first meetings of the United Nations General Assembly in the UN Security Council took place just a few hundred yards from here 80 years ago this year. We've stood alone against tyranny, stood up for freedom. We stood by our ally. We led the abolition of slavery and offered sanctuary to those who were persecuted. This year, the UK overtook India to become the fifth largest economy in the world.

London is consistently ranked alongside New York as the world's leading financial centre. The UK is recognised as being a world leader in fintech, medical research and AI. The industry is not of the past but of the future. The World Wide Web was invented by Tim Berners-Lee. Alan Turing was the father of AI. Geoffrey Hinton, the father of machine learning. Demis Hassabis is the brain behind Google. Google DeepMind. We have more unicorn businesses, billion dollar tech companies in this country than Germany and France combined.

And on a day in which we welcome into your Lordships House, another great Olympian in Baroness Grainger, we should remind ourselves that we gave the world so many of its great sports football, cricket, tennis and rugby. And of course, the Paralympics all invented here. The Premier League is the most watched sports league in the world, broadcast over 200 countries. Formula one is the most technical of all sports, and seven out of the ten teams are based here. When Lewis Hamilton won in Barcelona on Sunday, he stood on an all-British podium and our national as our national anthem was played.

It is the land of the enlightenment Hume, Smith. Locke. Newton's laws of motion. Darwin's theory of evolution continue to shape our understanding of the world. It is home to the National Health Service, the envy of the world. We are home to some of the greatest medical innovations Fleming's penicillin, IVF, CT, MRI scans, Crick, Watson and Franklin's discovery of the structure of DNA, the building block of life itself. And we are now at the forefront of vaccine development around the world. We are home to four of the top ten universities in the world.

We have won 148 Nobel Prizes, second only to the United States. Cambridge University alone has been awarded more Nobel Prizes than Germany. It's time for us to celebrate who we are, what we have in common, to drown out the voices of pessimism and division who've had their day. p country, but that privilege comes with Judaism to contribute to it and to make it even better. That will require us to come together to be united, not just in name, but in nature and purpose too.

That is what Jo Cox stood for, and that is what we must now work for here.
12:22
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin Portrait Baroness Morgan of Drefelin (Labour)
-
-
Yeah, my Lords, what. >> De force from the noble Lord. >> Thank you so much. I'm going to take that speech and print it out and stick it on my mirror and have and stick it on my mirror and have it as an affirmation in the morning. So, my Lords, it is a real honour to take part in this debate. And I and I pay tribute to my noble friend for her work as chair of the Jo Cox Foundation. As we reflect on the work of the Jo Cox Civility Commission, we are reminded as we.

As we've already heard of Jo's values and how she lived her life and her unwavering belief that a kinder, fairer and more tolerant society is within our reach. She understood. As we've heard, that connection is not an abstract ideal, but something practised daily through listening, through respectful disagreement, and through recognising our shared humanity. And yes, her words that we have more in common than that which divides us are an aspiration. But they are a challenge to us all, and we must keep them in mind as we go forward in our work in this House.

This challenge feels especially urgent today, the national discourse has become increasingly strained. Polarisation and declining trust and a harsher tone in public discourse is not simply a political concern. They affect how people relate to one another and how resilient our communities can be. The Civility Commission's findings make clear that the health of our democracy, as we have heard, depends not only on strong institutions, but on strong relationships between citizens, between us. If we are serious about rebuilding trust, we must recognise the essential role of our civil society.

Across the country, charities, voluntary groups and community organisations create those spaces that we need where people meet not as opponents, but as neighbours and collaborators. They foster belonging, participation and shared purpose. I see this every day, my Lords, in the work that I do with the United Youth Foundation in organisations such as the Scouts, the guides we've already heard from Saint John's Ambulance, the cadets, the police and the fire cadets. All of these youth organisations. They bring people from young people, from all backgrounds.

Together. They learn teamwork, service, responsibility. They form bonds that transcend difference and build the foundations of an active civil partnership. Each week, in communities up and down the country, more than 1 million young people are supported by over a quarter of a million trained volunteers. These local groups give young people a shared identity rooted in service, teamwork, belonging. They also create opportunities for young people to to build mutual understanding and enhance community cohesion. Their impact is strongest because local delivery is supported by national organisations that have the evidence, the oversight and the safeguarding frameworks to give young people the safe places that they need to ensure these programmes are effective.

And when young people to come together in these settings, differences begin to recede. They learn to lead, to listen and to support one another. They discovered that citizenship is not merely a concept, but something to be actively lived. This is how community identity and resilience is fostered, and through shared experience and participation. Yet I do have to say, my Lords, that despite our government's best intentions, funding for these groups is shaky. The Uniformed Youth Fund comes to an end and this does jeopardise many of the new places that were created through that work in areas, particularly of social deprivation.

And I get that the government needs to review funding streams to align with the new youth strategy, which I wholeheartedly welcome. But we can't afford a hiatus, and our communities do need better civil societies. Contribution extends well beyond youth provision, with over 170,000 charities and millions of volunteers, it plays a significant role in both our social fabric and our economy, too. Yet its true strength lies in the trust it commands. These organisations are deeply rooted in the communities they serve, reaching individuals who may feel disconnected.

Loneliness, as we've heard from formal institutions, and creating opportunities for meaning, for meaningful engagement across differences. And yes, we did see this during Covid, but we also saw it through moments of unrest, such as in Southport and in Belfast only very recently, where local people come together to repair the damage that's been done to their community, both physically with brooms, but also with support and for for other community members. So by by doing this, these community, these community groups give us all hope, as we heard from Lord Bates.

So we must yet also acknowledge the growing tensions that exist. Demand for services provided by civil society continue to rise, while funding and stability have not kept pace. We're asking more of these organisations at a time when many are under strain. This is especially true for youth services, where the work being done is not short term programme delivery, but the shaping of confident, resilient citizens. So will the Minister investigate the hiatus? I've talked about and look at what can be done to stabilise the the funding for the youth strategy.

So my Lords government does have a crucial role to play here. The civil society covenant is an important step, and I welcome that. And it's very important the work that's being done there and it's essential to the health of our democracy. And I welcome again the work of the Jo Cox, the the Jo Cox Foundation. And we remember her today with love and with sadness.
12:28
Baroness Shah Portrait Baroness Shah (Labour)
-
-
Yeah, yeah. you like to say a wonderful list from Lord Bates, who I will also be printing a copy of because it is very, very uplifting. My Lords, I did not know Jo Cox. I never had the privilege of hearing her speak. But in the years since her murder, I have come to understand her through the words of those who did and what they describe as somebody who believed the total conviction that politics could be a force for good, the public life could be conducted with decency, that you could hope that you could argue hard, but still treat your opponents as human beings worthy of respect.

It is in that spirit, her spirit, that I support the work of the Jo Cox Foundation and the Civility Commission, and in particular two recommendations that I wish to speak on today. The urgent need to regulate social media platforms, and the responsibility of all of us to model the behaviour that we want to see. I have spoken in this chamber and in this House before about the abuse and intimidation of elected councillors. I have described cars being set alight, candidates stalked, a candidate, punched unconscious on a doorstep.

Brilliant councils, councillors like Stockton Stockton council leader Councillor Lisa Evans, who I spoke to earlier who experienced a horrendous online abuse including doctored AI images of herself being published online, who now says the abuse is something that she is used to. This normalisation is unacceptable in our democracy. Over the last few weeks, many of us from many minority communities have begun to question whether we are truly welcome in this country anymore. Something has shifted in our discourse, and there seems to be a permission to to say and behave without sorry.

It seems to be permission to say whatever we want and behave without boundaries, regardless of the impact from both left and right. I said then that we are failing the people of who make local democracy work. And I say the same again today. When speaking to colleagues, councillors, MPs and activists, the scale of the problem has significantly worsened and through the Civility Commission we have a clear cross-party evidence based framework of what needs to be done. So firstly, on social media, the Commission calls on platforms to acknowledge the dramatic significance of local politicians, not just MPs and peers, but councillors, and to also provide better and faster routes for reporting abuse and misinformation.

It calls on Ofcom to specifically address the abuse of elected representatives. The evidence of what happens when platforms are platforms abandoned, that responsibility is not is now stark and quantified. My Lords, this House may be aware of the work of the Centre of countering digital hate. Their report, Safety Off, published just this month, should be required reading for anyone who doubts the scale of what we are facing. In January 2025, Metta rolled back its content moderation policies, cutting proactive enforcement of rules against violence, incitement, hateful conduct and bullying.

The CCG predicted a surge in abuse. What they found when they analysed nearly 8 million Facebook comments directed at members of Congress, was that abuse did not merely surge, it skyrocketed abuse comments over overall tripled, violent threats and hate quadrupled. And this was not just directed only on one side of the political aisle, the C, C, D named their report safety off because that's precisely what meta did. It switched off safety. When a platform with billions of users removes the guardrails against violent conduct, violent surges.

This is not a correlation. It is causation. The platforms know it and they choose it anyway. I am mindful that we are speaking in a British context and there are benefits to social media, but the platforms are the same, the algorithms are the same. The business model which rewards engagement is the same. This crosses borders. It shapes the environment, local, national and global research makes it clear that the majority of councillors who experience abuse experience it online. It is targeted, coordinated and disproportionately affects women, people of colour and those from minority communities.

Precisely the people whose presence in our politics make it more representative and more reflective of the country it serves. When abuse drives out people, we are not just losing individuals, we are making our politics narrower and doing so. We are making it weaker. The commission's second recommendation make is harder, which I'll speak to. It asks us, all of us involved in politics, to model respectful behaviour in the chamber, online, in public life, and it asks us to consider carefully the impact of our words on public discourse.

I think of Jo Cox here again, those who knew of her speak of somebody who, by instinct was a builder of bridges, who did not mistake loudness for strength or contempt for conviction, who understood that the way you argue matters just as much as the what you argue for. We live in a political moment that rewards the opposite with outrage, drives engagement. Inflammatory language spreads further and faster than measured argument. When the easiest path to a new cycle is to treat your opponent not as somebody with a different view, but as an enemy to be destroyed.

When jokes are made about an arson attack on the Prime Minister's home. And politicians at every level not are not just merely victims of this culture. We are sometimes the architects. My Lords, when a public figure uses demonising human, demonising language, it does not stay with the. Within the walls of Westminster. It travels. It gives them permission. It is heard by the Council of chairing a planning meeting or by the activists sending a message at midnight, online and offline. Abuse feed each other.

What says in public life shapes what is considered acceptable online and what is permitted online shapes what happens on our street. The commission asks us to take responsibility for that not to be silenced, not to abandon robust, robust debate. Jo Cox herself fiercely believed in that, but to recognise that there is a difference between holding, between challenging an argument and degrading a person, between holding a power to account and making public life uninhabitable. My Lords, ten years on from Jo Cox's murder, the threat to our democracy has not receded.

It has changed shape, moved online, become faster and more persuasive, and is actively enabled by the choices of the wealthiest companies in human history. Those. The response of the Commission is called for is to do the practical things. Yes, regulate the platforms, protect the candidates, resource the police, but also do the harder thing. Be the politician that you want others to be. I truly believe that we can. I, I remain defiant against hope, hate and division. We have far more in common with each other than the things that divide us.

It remains one of the most important sentences in modern British politics, and it remains a decade on the work we still have not finished. still have not finished.
12:35
Baroness Dacres of Lewisham Portrait Baroness Dacres of Lewisham (Labour)
-
-
My Lords Jo Cox will always be remembered for her belief that we have far more in common than that which divides us in today's often angry and fractured political climate, these words feel as important and as necessary as ever. They are a reminder of the kind of politics and scrutiny and society many people want to see. I was profoundly shaped by the inaugural Jo Cox Women in Leadership programme, established in her memory to support more women into public life.

Many women from that first cohort have gone on to serve in leadership roles across public life. I'm proud to sit on these benches both my. With my noble friend, the Baroness Hyde of badminton, who was part who's part of our first cohort. That experience reinforced how important it is that politics feels open to people from every background, especially those who are too often excluded from leadership or unheard in various institutions. The lived experience, insight, and perspectives we bring to the table matter.

They make our politics stronger, our decisions better, and our democracy more representative. The Commission recognises that abuse, intimidation and hostility are not simply unpleasant features of modern politics. They silence voices, drive good people away from public service and weaken democratic participation itself. If people feel unable to engage in public life because of fear, intimidation or abuse, our democracy is poorer for it. We also know that the abuse is not experienced equally. Women, people from ethnic minority backgrounds and younger representatives are too often subjected to particularly vicious abuse.

If that becomes normalised, we risk creating a politics where only the most privileged or thick skinned feel able to participate. That cannot be acceptable in a healthy democracy. My Lords, civility does not mean avoiding disagreement. Democracy depends on debate, challenge and scrutiny. But there is a profound difference between disagreement and dehumanisation. Freedom of speech is fundamental, but so are responsibility and accountability. Words can inspire and unite, but they can also wound and divide. Too often, anger now travels faster than understanding.

Social media can reward outrage over reflection and division over dialogue. Hostility and misinformation are amplified in ways that deepen divisions rather than understanding. That is why the Commission's focus on political and media literacy is so important. In the age of misinformation and polarisation, helping people develop the confidence and critical thinking skills to question and challenge what they see online and what they hear has become more important than ever. If we are honest, that lesson may not be limited to just young people.

In Lewisham. I've seen the value of bringing people together across differences and generations through interfaith work, libraries, community spaces and civic participation. The more people from different backgrounds, communities and cultures are able to learn from one another, share experiences, and listen with openness. The stronger understanding, respect, and trust between us becomes. That is why strengthening civility and strengthening community must go hand in hand. There must be stronger codes of conduct and higher standards of behaviour at all levels of public life, in public life, language and behaviour that we would would be unacceptable elsewhere are sometimes dismissed as simply part of politics.

Those in public life at every level must lead by example through tone that we set, the respect we show and through the standards we uphold. One of the greatest tributes we can pay to Jo Cox memory is to build a politics where more people feel able to step forward and contribute, where different voices are welcomed, and where we recognise that our differences need not divide us. Because when people are encouraged to participate, rather than being pushed away, our democracy, our communities and our country are stronger for it.

And my Lords, that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

is the responsibility that we all must share. Thank you. My Lords.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords. I couldn't I can't disagree with

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I couldn't I can't disagree with what the noble Baroness lady has just shared with us, and particularly I think that this particularly I think that this House and the Other place welcomes many women that have come through the Jo Cox programme, and that has the Jo Cox programme, and that has made our politics much better and richer. We are far more united and have far more in common than which divides us. As we mark the 10th
12:41
Baroness Smith of Llanfaes Portrait Baroness Smith of Llanfaes (Plaid Cymru)
-
-
anniversary of the murder of Jo Cox MP, we are reminded of her profound MP, we are reminded of her profound legacy and the enduring power of those words. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Royal, for bringing Baroness, Lady Royal, for bringing this important debate before the House. I've been deeply moved by the many thoughtful contributions the many thoughtful contributions we have heard today. While I did not have the privilege of knowing Jo personally, I have in a small way come to know her through her sister Kim.

Most recently, we found ourselves on opposing sides in an inter-parliamentary tug of war raising funds for Macmillan. It was a light hearted moment, but also a powerful demonstration of what can bring us together, even across lines of difference. The Jo Cox Foundation Civility Commission in its recent report, a renewed call to Action for the Devolved Nations offers a series of important and practical recommendations which deserve careful consideration. The findings are rather striking. 75% of Senate members and Welsh MPs reported that there are times when they feel unsafe in their role.

Many elected representatives across the devolved nations do not feel able to participate in public life fully and freely. Abuse and intimidation, we are told, are driving people away from politics altogether. This is deeply concerning. A healthy democracy depends upon participation on people from all backgrounds. Feeling able to step forward, to serve and to speak without fear. The report's recommendations are constructive and grounded in collaboration between elected representatives and civil society. They include calls for the devolved parliaments to provide clearer guidance and support to members and their families for adequate resourcing of Operation Ford, the police support mechanism for elected representatives, for political parties to enforce robust codes of conduct, and for all of us in public life to model respected behaviour.

I particularly like to commend the recommendations specific to Wales. They are practical, clearly articulated and directed to the appropriate institutions. At a time when political discourse can feel increasingly divisive, such clarity and focus are especially welcome. I've always believed that disagreement is both natural and necessary in a democracy. At its best, it sharpens thinking and leads to better outcomes. But tone does matter, and we're seeing with growing frequency forms of political discourse that are unnecessarily abrasive and at times seek to demonise entire communities that does little to advance understanding and risks deepening division.

We all, individually and collectively have a responsibility to set a better example. Turning again to the report, its publication in the lead up to elections in both Wales and Scotland, may understandably have meant that some of its messages were lost amid the pre-election debate. However, even in the months since, there have been welcome signs of progress in Wales. Thanks to the report, the Senedd has begun piloting a social media monitoring scheme to support members and has published its report. As for all the family friendly and inclusive Parliament review, which includes proposals to address abuse, including the establishment of a safe Participation in Politics Task Force.

Further, the Welsh Government has taken important steps including exempting safety related expenditure from campaign finance limits and introducing voluntary diversity and inclusion guidance for political parties guidance, which I know my own party has engaged actively with during the recent Senate election. The Jo Cox Foundation also contributed to the development of a digital safety guide for candidates working alongside organisations such as Shout Out UK, Glitch and Elekta. I know that many candidates found this resource not only practical but reassuring at what can be a particularly exposed moment in public life.

These are all positive developments, but there's clearly much more to do, so I'd therefore be grateful if the noble Baroness, Lady Royall, could provide an update on the responses received from institutions and bodies in Wales to these recommendations, and whether she anticipates any barriers to their full implementation. And I'd also like to ask the Minister a specific question relating to the recommendation directed at His Majesty's Government, namely, what consideration has been given to expanding the remit and resourcing of the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre to cover members of the devolved parliaments, in addition to its existing responsibilities for members in the other Place and First Ministers.

My Lords, if we're serious about honouring Jo Cox's legacy, we must ensure that public life remains open, safe and respectful. Civility is not a constraint on political disagreement. It is a condition that makes healthy disagreement possible. So we must ask ourselves, what kind of politics do we want to model for those who come after us, and for the communities that Parliament is here to serve?
12:47
Lord Smith of Finsbury Portrait Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour)
-
-
My Lords, >> Jo. >> Cox was a dear friend and it is so hard to realise that ten years so hard to realise that ten years have passed since her tragic murder. I want to thank my noble friend Baroness Royall for tabling the motion for this important debate and also for her continuing brilliant work chairing the Jo Cox Foundation. We commemorate Jo's memory best by holding fast to what she said in her maiden speech in the House of Commons, and that every single speaker in this debate so far have quoted that we have far more in common than that which divides us.

We need surely to relearn that lesson now more than ever. The Civility Commission and the Jo Cox Foundation help us to do so. Their focus is particularly on the abuse and violence directed at elected representatives. They are about promoting a respectful, inclusive politics. We need only to think of Jo Cox herself, of David David Amess, of Stephen Timms, but also of the levels of abuse directed at many other politicians, at both national and local level, especially abuse directed towards women representatives and towards political representatives of colour.

This can never be right. Respectful disagreement is what democracy and democratic politics ought to be all about. But it goes further than this all too often at the moment, the response of some voters and some political figures to issues and challenges is to resort to hatred and violence. The scenes we saw in Southampton and elsewhere, in the aftermath of the tragic death of Henry Novak and what happened in Belfast following the assault on Stephen Ogilvy, are obvious recent examples.

What happened to Henry Novak and Stephen Ogilvy was, of course, unimaginably awful. But there are some political figures in our country who will turn tragedy into a political opportunity for rage and hatred and violence. Such a response, however, diminishes them, undermines our community and society, and does huge damage to our country. It stems ultimately from fear of difference, fear of otherness, and the prejudice that follows from that. It's what gave us nearly 40 years ago the wretchedness of section 28.

It's what has fuelled much of the rise of the far right around the world. It's what leads to manufactured, whipped up protest about migrants and asylum seekers. There are, of course, good and bad migrants. There are good and bad members of society more generally, but manufactured outrage is primarily something fostered by bad actors. Let's instead listen to the families of Henry Novak and Stephen Ogilvy, who have bravely asked us all not to turn the tragedies that have affected them into weaponised division and violence.

Let's listen to the wise words of Jo Cox, reminding us that we have so much in common. Let's celebrate the richness and diversity of our communities. Let's hold fast to the idea that we only make progress when we unite, when we do things together, when we do not foster division and hatred, let's do better.
12:52
Baroness Hyde of Bemerton Portrait Baroness Hyde of Bemerton (Labour)
-
-
Yeah. remember the amazing Jo Cox, who I met when she was chair of Labour Women's Network, and I was starting my political journey, spending a weekend together in Bristol on a Labour Women's Network training course. She shone brightly and we heard many testimonies last Thursday in the other place, about how being in Jo's presence changed people for the better, how she drew people together, creating connection. In my maiden speech, I spoke about my preoccupation with how we live well together, and five months on, I am more preoccupied than ever.

The three interconnected priorities of the Jo Cox Foundation set up in her memory are sadly, unrelentingly relevant to us today, addressing loneliness, civility and public life, and grassroots community work, bringing all kinds of people together. There is a need to urgently and comprehensively address and think through on the ground solutions, as well as policy levers that create spaces and places, physical and otherwise, that that enable everyone in society to thrive. There's some brilliant suggestions in the Civility Commission recommendations, some of which have been adopted, and we've heard about the excellent work today of the youth sector, from my noble friend Baroness Morgan.

This desire is not born out of a utopian idealism, but as my noble friend Baroness Dacre pointed out, it's born out of living and working in diverse settings. My experience in Islington taught me similarly, from community centres to the council chamber, it is possible to build community, to build empathy, to increase understanding and to seek the common good. Connection with other human beings is essential to this. Listening is essential. Being open to learning is also essential. Kate Tempest says this better than I can in the song People's Faces.

It's hard to accept that we're all one and the same flesh, given the rampant divisions between the oppressor and oppressed that we are, though more empathy, less greed, more respect. The last several decades have seen our social fabric stretched thin and to breaking point in an often atomised and individualistic world, there is an urgent need to renew communal life, to renew solidarity, to commit to being together in spaces with people who do not look or sound like us, to challenge ourselves to listen well and ask questions.

Human beings are amazing. We are constantly evolving, continually being made and remade every day, becoming and emerging. No one is fixed in their identity. No one is complete. And because of that ongoing evolution, it means there is always hope and there is always the possibility of change and of shift. And I've seen that in my work, in prisons, in my work with people, in addiction, and in my own life, day by day. Sometimes it's little by little, and sometimes it's all at once.

In this giant wave, people can and do change. Communities can and do change connection with other humans. A sense of belonging, doing something to meet the need of another. The great late Archbishop Desmond Tutu knew a thing or two about helping people to live together well, and his whole work was grounded in a concept of ubuntu. I am because we are. My humanity is caught up and inextricably bound up in others. And because my humanity is bound up with others in this nation, I cannot ignore the pain and rage spilling out in Belfast, in Southampton.

Neither can I ignore the fear and terror of my friends who are people of colour and the things they're expressing, the fear they're expressing about going about their daily lives. And I cannot ignore the survivors of trafficking. I met last week with Sophie Hayes Foundation, telling me about the failings of so-called safe houses and the failings of the national referral mechanism. My humanity is caught up and inextricably bound up in others. Connection and listening. I don't know what that looks like in every community up and down our great nation.

I know my community. It looked like the Arsenal parade. It looked like an interfaith meal, the Community homework club and my Lords, we have a responsibility. As others have pointed out in this House today, to foster community, to foster connection, to share a meal, to be careful how we speak. The philosopher Emmanuel Levinas took the face of the other as his foundational ethical concept, encountering another precious and totally unique human being face to face human connection, seeking to understand and as legislators, a commitment to listen, learn and collaborate with communities to find answers so we can live together well.

I'm not afraid of hard work, so let's go. Rolled up sleeves, sharp minds, soft hearts. The common good must be sought because we have far more in common than that which divides us.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yeah. I would like to pay my respects to Jo Cox family and to respects to Jo Cox family and to all her friends. And also to thank my friend Baroness Royall for arranging to have this debate today arranging to have this debate today and the work of the Jo Cox Foundation, because without the work that they have been doing, we would not be here today. The communities would not be in the situation they are, and we would situation they are, and we would not be training women to come into public life.

And more and more we need to do this, and more and more we need to work with schools and other institutions so that young people know, like the Girl Guides
12:58
Baroness Goudie Portrait Baroness Goudie (Labour)
-
-
and others, that there's every door is open to them. And I mean, every is open to them. And I mean, every door is open to them. I was lucky to be brought up and being told that every door was open to me. But that every door was open to me. But not everybody has that opportunity, or they are bullied in every way from being bullied at school, being bullied at work, being bullied somewhere. When somebody is bullied, they go into their house, they go into a room and they never come out into a room and they never come out of it again.

And that is where we have all these problems in many ways in the community, as part of our role is to stop that happening. I first met Jo when she was working at Oxfam, and then when she came to the House of Commons and I was here, she introduced me to the work they were doing on Syria and also the White Helmets, which we worked

**** Possible New Speaker ****

together on until I still Work with them. But but Mr. Joe

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Work with them. But but Mr. Joe deeply. I also went just after Joe died to Trafalgar Square, when we had a memorial outside, and I had a memorial outside, and I brought home which Baroness Royall one of the placards that we had one of the placards that we had that day, and brought it home, got it cleaned, and I had it framed, and I have that at my desk. And and I have that at my desk. And it's reminds me every day about what we should be doing and why we should be doing it.

It is so important to ensure that women, which make up 50%, 50.7% of our population in this country, what percentage of them are not in public life? They are not in public life because they're not persuaded to be in there. Or when they thought about it, they're bullied and saying not for them, or they try and they're bullied. We have to insist that women are selected at every level. Otherwise, we will not have the right form of communities. They will not be form their children to do this.

Also. For example, women should be there should be more women magistrates. There is a big shortage of magistrates and women and young girls should be taught about magistrates system so that they know at a later life that they should apply and to be trained. As far as the situation in terms of MPs, councillors and other people in public life, the whole question of being bullied is now got beyond it, I'm afraid, by the rhetoric that we're seeing outside, and we have not taken it seriously enough.

We now have to take this seriously and if necessary, as Jo Cox Foundation has said, we have to take stronger legislation because councillors should not have stuff thrown at their doors, eggs thrown at their cars, their children interfered with, tainted at school, tainted at university and so on. It is absolutely vital that we follow the recommendations of the Jo Cox recent report and those in better in common, because we want a society that is together that's going to thrive.

Because we don't thrive, our country will not thrive. And that is why it is important, too, that we encourage women in public life to apply to be on boards at every level, whether it's local level or international levels, and to take men with us as well. But it is men and women working together in communities. And to stop what we're seeing over the last couple of years, including what we're seeing on, on, on, on in the media and on, on the web.

It is disgraceful and we must do everything we can to stop it happening, because this abuse must be must cease. Thank you again for having this debate today. The report, and we must continue to build on this report and to have you.
13:02
Lord Jamieson Portrait Lord Jamieson (Conservative)
-
-
Thank you. >> Thank the noble Baroness Royal for introducing this debate and raising the importance of community, of respect, of getting involved and of the work of the Jo Cox Foundation. I do need to declare that I am still a councillor in Central Bedfordshire. I particularly want to thank Lord Bates because I thought this debate might be a bit of a downer, but you really uplifted this debate and I think we're all feeling much better for that. And I think that is the right legacy for Jo Cox and others, for us to feel good and not bad.

And we should look up, not down, and recognise what a wonderful country we live in and that the vast majority of people are good. We need to cherish and protect that which makes our country great. We need to rely on our politicians to lead and develop our country. We want the best politicians. Politicians should not need to continually look over their shoulder for threats when they inevitably have to make what will be difficult decisions, because there will be difficult decisions for all politicians.

I particularly want to focus on councillors as an ex-chairman of the Local Government Association might not be surprised. Councillors are embedded in their community and I would say in many ways face greater risks because they're well known. Doesn't matter whether your address is published or not. Most people know where you live as a councillor because you are part of that community. The LGA survey in 2025 showed that 72% of councillors have faced abuse, 50% were subject to misinformation and 25% had threats of violence.

Now we want the best councillors and traditionally many councillors were not particularly political driven. They just basically wanted to help their community do what was right. Maybe it was try and get a leisure centre built. Maybe, like me, they were fed up with too many potholes, whatever it was. But it wasn't because they were, oh, I am definitely a strong Labour person or a Labour strong conservative person or whatever it was. They just wanted to do good. And that was why when I was chairman of the LGA, I launched the Debate Not Hate campaign, being topical to play the ball, not the player.

As the noble Baroness Shah said, we need to recognise what we say matters and the age of social media comments made will inevitably be exaggerated. They will be misquoted, they will be distorted and frequently snowball. One of the reasons I like door knocking is that I actually get the chance to talk to somebody for five and ten minutes. Pretty much never have I walked away from a door and had somebody say, you're a terrible person. They might still not disagree. Sorry, they may still disagree with me, but at least we had the opportunity to realise that we were coming from different angles.

But you know, we could be wrong, but we weren't bad. And I think that's really important when we have our debates. We shouldn't imply somebody is wrong because they are bad, they're wrong because we may have different set of values, because we don't agree with their analysis, but it doesn't make them bad. And I think that's a shortcut that causes huge problems. And the risk, I would say in reality is the noble Baroness Dacres of Lewisham said, is that you only get the people who are thick skinned.

To which I would add also the highly motivated to stand. And that's not good. That's not good for our country, that's not good for our local communities. And it's not enough to talk about community. We need to live in and be comfortable with our actions, that we respect each other, and we don't give the opportunity for this foul abuse.
13:05
Lord Pack Portrait Lord Pack (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My Lords. >> Jo Cox, as many of you know so well, only had 13 months as a member of Parliament before the tragic, horrific end to her parliamentary career, but it is a huge tribute to her legacy, epitomised by today's debate, that her impact has been far greater than frankly, many people have served for rather longer. It is a huge tribute to her. Now, my own path in politics never crossed with hers, although I did spend like her some years in in politics in Yorkshire.

But I know other members of the Liberal Democrat benches speak very fondly of their memories of working on a cross-party basis with her, and her legacy is an important one because her work, her beliefs, her commitments are, ten years on, still so relevant, both to strangers, to her, like myself and to those who have the privilege of the happy memories of her, of working with her and the friendship they experienced. Happy memories, of course, tinged with sadness of knowing what has since been missing in their lives.

And an important part of her legacy is, of course, carried forward by the Jo Cox Foundation, and I pay tribute to its scope, its ambition and its necessary persistence. There is, of course, a a positive, a happy upside so neatly epitomised in Lord Vaizey speech earlier to the challenges that the Foundation tries to help us see through. But there are also some grimmer ones as well. And to focus on just one aspect of those. I think we've heard both in today's debate and indeed in our recent debate a few days ago, focusing on abuse and intimidation in local government specifically.

Just what a serious challenge that is. And it's quite shocking that the LGA survey of councillors involved in the May elections this year found that 70%, nearly 3 in 4, had faced at least some form of abuse or intimidation. And we quite rightly worry about the safety and the security of parliamentarians. But councillors often have far fewer security provisions, far less support available to them. And those threats that danger can feel just as real and just as damaging and corrosive to our democracy as it does to parliamentarians.

And we've seen the importance of the Jo Cox Foundation's work on civility in our politics. Also, in a way, this week with the news at the beginning of this week of the conviction of two people for arson offences related to the Prime Minister. Now, an important part of that story, of course, which no doubt we will return to in one of the debates next week, are the Russian links of those people. But foreign powers can only incite violence in our politics if people within this country are also willing, able to be enticed into violence themselves.

And we're reminded also, I think, of one of the challenges the Jo Cox Foundation rightly faces up to every time. Frankly, we look at our phones, every time we turn to see what is new on social media, and we have to battle against that temptation that those algorithms deliberately have to try to pull us into extreme emotions to try to secure our time and our engagement. But that also often means inciting and encouraging anger, often even our dislike of others.

And although there are many positives of social media, there are many positives indeed that we shouldn't forget. So often it pulls us towards division. It pulls us towards anger, even hatred. And in the worst cases, violence. And so while I think there is broadly, as we've heard in the speeches today, a broad understanding and a broad shared commitment to face up to these challenges, I think it's also fair to say there is a widespread feeling that whilst it is welcome that, for example, the government has been listening on many of the issues that have been raised in today's debate.

There is also a general concern that more needs to be done and it needs to be done quickly. And just to give two simple examples, the I've mentioned the importance of the safety of local councillors and those involved in local government in particular. We heard in the debate a few days ago about, I think it's fair to say, the very mixed reputation that Operation Ford the police activities to help protect councillors has in some cases, rightly, very highly praised. But often people feel it is frustratingly short of what is needed to properly protect them.

And we've also seen the importance of continued commitment to action and maybe even hopefully, an acceleration of action in the continuing control over the ability to create non-consensual nudes of people on using the tool. And I think obviously that is a problem that affects many people in many different ways, but people who are prominent in public life in some way, such as people who put themselves forward to stand in elections, are particularly vulnerable to those issues. And we've seen a sequence of claims by Grock about how they are dealing with those issues so far, always followed by more journalistic investigations showing that actually the issue has not been ended.

So as we remember, Jo Cox and others such as Sir David Amess, and also, for example, in my own party, particularly Andrew Pennington, who lost his life protecting Nigel Jones, then a member of Parliament of then a member of the other House and later a member of this House. Their memories, I think, should prompt us to do more, to move more quickly

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and to honour their legacy. My Lords, it's a pleasure to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, it's a pleasure to contribute to this debate today and thoroughly embarrassing and sitting thoroughly embarrassing and sitting there humbling to hear the contributions of many members. It's contributions of many members. It's with a deep sense of duty that I rise to address the work of the Jo Cox Civility Commission, and the Cox Civility Commission, and the broader imperative of safeguarding those who participate in public life. The murders of Jo Cox and Sir David Amess were not merely acts of violence against individuals, they were profound violations of democracy.

That in that democracy that binds our society together. But they also remind us of something else the values that Jo Cox lived by working together, respect for others, and a belief that we have far more in common than that which divides us. And I think every speaker has mentioned that. So in itself, I think that that's a really good testament. Those values must shape not only our response to rising hostility, but the kind of political culture we wish to build.

Yet despite the the clarity of the Commission's recommendations and the urgency of the threat, the government's response has been insufficient to meet the challenge. The scale of the challenge before us. My Lords, the Commission issued 28 recommendations, yet only seven have been adopted so far, and I think we'd be all encouraging that the rest should be looked at very, very quickly. It's particularly troubling for someone like myself that none of the recommendations relating to local government have been implemented.

As has been said, local councillors, who often serve without any staff, without security and without the institutional protections afforded to members of either House, remain acutely vulnerable. As the former leader of Bexley Council, I know this vulnerability all too well. My colleagues and I were ourselves subjected to sustained abuse, often anonymous, often keyboard warriors, often deeply personal and mainly inaccurate simply for carrying out the responsibilities of public office. The fallout impacting both officers and members, their health, their families and their lives.

It's an experience shared by councillors across the country, and it underlines why the commission's recommendations on local government cannot be treated as optional. The Commission's call to expand Operation Bridger to support local councillors was clear and unambiguous. The government's inaction leaves a significant gap in our national resilience, and it's entirely proper to ask how we ensure local democracy is not treated as a secondary concern. The government frequently cites the Online Safety Act as evidence of progress.

Yet the lived experience of elected representatives tells a very different story. As has been mentioned, the 2025 Survey of Members of Parliament revealed levels of threat and intimidation that should trouble every member of this House. Women and members from minority ethnic backgrounds face disproportionate levels of abuse. Candidates in the 2024 general election were twice as likely to face abuse if they were women, and three times as likely if they were from minority ethnic backgrounds. The commission's recommendation that social media companies provide enhanced support to candidates, particularly during election periods, remains unimplemented.

My Lords, the dangers of social media are no longer abstract. They influence those who feel able to stand for office, who feel safe to speak, and who feel welcome in public life. A third of girls and young women now say they are deterred from entering politics because of the hostility they see online. If we do not address this, we risk losing a generation of talent. Furthermore, the commission identified the absence of central government unit as one of the principal obstacles to progress.

Without such a unit, efforts across police forces, regulators, political parties and tech companies remain fragmented and inconsistent. The renewal of the Defending Democracy Taskforce is welcome, but it is not a substitute for a dedicated, properly resourced coordinating body. The commission was unequivocal this is a systemic challenge requiring a systemic response. The government must provide one. My Lords, the Commission's call for impartial political and media literacy to be embedded in the curriculum is both timely and necessary.

Yet the government's proposed reforms will not take effect until 2027, with the teaching beginning in 2028 to 29, five years after the commission's first call to action in a digital environment where misinformation spreads in seconds, this delay has real world consequences, and we must recognise that civility is not only about how we conduct politics, but also about how we sustain community cohesion, loneliness and social disconnection remain significant challenges. They weaken trust, reduce civic participation and increase vulnerability to polarisation.

Jo Cox understood that democracy is strengthened when communities are connected. That's why the great Get Together, now marking its 10th year, matters. It's a reminder that respect is built locally through the simple act of bringing people together within the representation of people's Bill. We welcome the measures that protect candidates from harassment and intimidation, but we may remain vigilant against any drift towards the policing of legitimate political expression. Democracy must protect those who serve within it, but it must also preserve the right of citizens to criticise those who hold power.

My Lords, at the heart of this debate lies a simple truth. Democracy is not self sustaining. It requires care, vigilance and a willingness to comfort, to confront the uncomfortable realities the Jo Cox Civility Commission has provided a thoughtful and comprehensive blueprint for strengthening the integrity of political culture. It is now for the government to act not with selectivity or delay, but with the seriousness that this moment demands. If we fail to protect those who serve, we risk diminishing the very institutions upon which our freedoms depend.

If we fail to foster respect, we risk losing the trust that holds our society together. And if we fail to work together, we risk forgetting the message that Jo Cox gave us, that we are far more united and have far more in common than that which divides us.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, that's been an incredibly thoughtful and well incredibly thoughtful and well informed debate, and I'm very pleased to respond for the government. I'd like to thank my noble friend Baroness Royal for opening the debate. And all noble Lords have spoken for some outstanding, truly outstanding contributions. Today, I want to contributions. Today, I want to start paying tribute to our work to preserve Jo's legacy. Tuesday marked ten years since Jo's tragic murder. Now my thoughts and I'm sure the thoughts of the whole house will be with her family and friends, with Brendan, with colon, with Layla, and of course, our wonderful colleague in the other place, Kim Leadbeater, Jo's sister.
13:20
13:21
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage Portrait Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)
-
-
in need. And I want to take a moment now to echo these sentiments. In this House, the hatred and violence which led to this senseless act has no place in our society, and I am grateful to those who have worked tirelessly over the last decade to counter violent extremism and to bring our communities together. My noble friend Baroness Royall mentioned Sir David Amess, and I have an abiding memory of working in Southend Council on a peer review on the first anniversary of Sir David's murder, and feeling the enduring impact of his loss.

Again. And even in the wake of tragedy, the number of people who seek to come together greatly outnumber those who aim to divide. Now more than ever, it's imperative that we build stronger and more resilient communities. This is the key to bringing people together, restoring pride in place, repairing social cohesion across the UK. It is a core priority for our government. However, in today's uncertain and changing world, community resilience has also become a matter of national security.

We all know hostile actors, both at home and abroad, now seek to sow division and undermine local resilience as a means to pursue their own agendas and undermine our national interests. We know that a strong nation demands strong communities, and we will prevent subversive forces from undermining the community bonds that are the very foundation of this country. Despite the threats we face, I am confident in the foundations we are building on. When people think of resilience or community strength, they often invoke images of the blitz spirit, nostalgic for a sense of defiant community that they fear may be lost.

But I put it to you this resilience endures. As we were reminded by my my noble friend. My noble friend Baroness Smith. And I see this every day in my own community, not least when, when around the people that are there every single day in my community. And it was just last Sunday, I met with 25000 people and hundreds of community groups and organisations, musicians, dancers, sports people, politicians of all stripes, local businesses, all gathered together to celebrate our town at Stevenage Day.

That was on Sunday and I was very grateful to the noble Lord Bates for his reminder of that fantastic reminder he gave us of our history and our legacy. And we. We all celebrated Scotland's World Cup win on the 14th of June and England's fantastic win over Croatia last night. And I. Some. I think it was. Baroness Hyde also said she wasn't going to mention the Arsenal parade and I'm not going to mention the Arsenal parade either. But you know, it was estimated there were a million people there all celebrating together.

I welcome Baroness Grainger comments and celebrate the first all-British podium in Formula One since 1968, and I'm only wiggling that in because, of course, Lewis Hamilton was a Stevenage boy, but it was that first that first joint podium. And I have to say, in relation to Lewis Hamilton, he has invested very heavily in in ironing out some of the inequalities in Stem through his mission 44 project, and I'm really grateful for that. My noble friend Baroness Morgan reminded us of the veritable army of volunteers out there who support our young people in sport, in scouting and guides, and a myriad of other activities.

Their work often goes unrecognised, and I think we should celebrate what they all do. And as Lord Jamieson said, we should celebrate the enormous good in every community. As X councillors, we've. Many of us in this room saw this, see and see this every day in our work. So this resilience endures. We saw it at the height of the Covid pandemic. When neighbours came together to support each other. They shot for the elderly and delivered prescriptions for the vulnerable in the face of sickness and isolation.

Communities united to make sure no one was left behind. And, more importantly, in the wake of the unrest that gripped Southport in 2024, local residents came together to rebuild their neighbourhood. And I must remember, I must say I had a real lump in my throat when I saw that that young man helping to rebuild the wall that had been knocked down the day after that happened. Amidst the grief of community tragedy, people took a stand against prejudice, clearly saying that this violence was not in their name.

And I'm going to use Joe's words too. We are far more united and have far more in common than that which divides us now. When building strong, resilient communities, it's important to remember we are not defined by our lowest moments, but by how we respond to them. To this end, government is taking tangible action to support community resilience across our country. In March this year, I presented the Social Cohesion Action Plan to the House. Cohesion is not about suppressing differences. We should embrace and celebrate our diverse communities, but it's about renewing a shared social contract rooted in our fundamental British values democracy, the rule of law and which my noble friend Lord Hermer has spoken so powerfully on individual liberty and on mutual respect and tolerance.

Our plan, entitled Protecting What Matters, sets out our cross-government approach to building confident, cohesive and resilient communities. Of course, this agenda necessitates a whole of society approach, and it does not fall within the remit of just one department to build resilience. We are resetting our approach to counter extremism, focusing on ensuring a consistent understanding of extremism across government, countering extremist influence in the UK and abroad, and strengthening measures against extremist abuse of our institutions. The plan also supports resilience to online harms, building on the Online Safety Act to provide greater platform transparency, stronger media protections for children, and better crisis response during periods of harm.

More widely, Mhclg Common Ground Resilience Fund will help deliver targeted cohesion and integration interventions and support local authorities and grassroots organisations to run practical initiatives that bring people together. But as my noble friend Baroness Shah and Baroness Dacre said, we must all show the leadership our roles enshrine. Words matter, we must watch our own and we must call out those who forget how language can divide and forget how language can divide and intimidate. In relation to the Civility Commission recommendations.

Earlier this month, I stood before the House and responded to a debate on intimidation of councillors. The examples of abhorrent behaviour councillors have been subjected to that we heard from my noble friend Lord Forbes and others were seriously disturbing, a stark reminder of the scale of challenge that faces US harassment and intimidation of candidates and elected representatives must not be treated as an inevitable part of public life, but recognised as a direct threat to our democracy and to democratic representation.

I am also aware of the vulnerabilities of some of our frontline workers. I was very pleased that the Crime and Policing Act introduced new protection for retail workers, and I started a dialogue from my own department's perspective with the planning profession, whose members are often in public meetings and at the front line of people's frustration with the planning system. It's unacceptable that they, or anyone else doing their job should be subject to intimidating or threatening behaviour. The Civility Commission has made a range of recommendations across sectors for national government, parliament, local government, police, the courts, political parties, politicians, regulators and social media companies.

Clearly, we all have a role to play in creating a stronger, more resilient society and this must be a joint effort, a joint responsibility, and I am pleased the government has made progress in this space. As part of the Defending Democracy Policing Protocol, we have committed to funding Operation Ford, something that Baroness Smith mentioned, and this provides a dedicated elected official adviser in every police force to provide security briefings and work with local authorities to coordinate appropriate security support.

Where heightened risk is identified. Lord Pack raised the somewhat inconsistent application of Operation Ford. I heard that as well in last week's debate, and I will feed that back and see what can be done. And Baroness Smith asked me about the fixated threat assessment. I will write to her on that issue. We're also taking decisive action to tackle harassment and intimidation of voters, electoral staff and campaigners. We are changing the law so those convicted of intimidating or abusing electoral staff can be disqualified from holding or seeking elected office.

This will bring electoral staff under the same protection already given to candidates, campaigners and elected representative under the Elections Act 2022 and the representation of the people Bill will allow tougher sentences to those who abuse candidates, campaigners, elected representatives and electoral staff. In addition, we will remove the requirement for election agents, including candidates acting as their own agents, to have home addresses published on the notice of election agents with regards to publishing anonymised data on protected characteristics of election candidates, government is committed to commencing section 106 of the Equality Act 2010, and we are exploring when and how we can commence that provision.

Careful consideration needs to be given as to how it might be implemented and the necessary supporting regulations, and whether any phasing might be needed to implementation. Turning to some of the specific issues raised by noble Lords in the debate, there was some very powerful speeches, which included speaking about loneliness from my noble friend Baroness Royall, Baroness Morgan and Baroness Hyde, and we're working very hard to ensure that improving social connection and tackling loneliness are embedded in government policy making, including the Pride in Place strategy.

Backed by £5.8 billion over ten years, the Men's Health Strategy and the National Youth Strategy. And there is a particular issue around young people and loneliness, and that strategy is backed by £500 million over three years, and that the youth strategy will provide safe spaces, fun activities and trusted adults to mentor and support our young people. And can I thank Baroness for her welcome for the report. And of course, I'm very happy to meet her. Baroness Shah, Baroness Goudie, Lord Pack and Lord Jamieson and Baroness O'Neill all referred to the harassment and intimidation of of local councillors and Lord Pack and Lord Jamieson referred to some of the startling figures in the LGA survey.

And of course, I share the concerns that this. I'm very glad the LGA are doing that survey, but very alarmed by some of the figures it's showing us. So we do need to take decisive action on this issue and ensure people are not put off from campaigning and standing for public office. And that's one of the reasons why we're changing the law and why the provisions in the representation of the people Bill will empower courts to give tougher sentences to those who abuse candidates, campaigners, elected representatives and electoral staff by introducing a new statutory aggravating factor.

Baroness O'Neill spoke about work going on across a set of recommendations. Well, there is, although there are some that are formally approved, there is work going on right across the board, across the recommendations, so I can assure her we are taking those recommendations very seriously. Baroness, my noble friend Baroness Royall Baroness Dacres talked about local government standards, and we do intend to strengthen the current standards and conduct regime to make sure all local authority members embody the highest standards of conduct the electorate have a right to expect, and greater devolution will certainly rely on.

We published a government response to a consultation in November last year, and we do intend to legislate on whole system reform, and those reforms will provide the tools needed to deal swiftly and fairly with misconduct in every type and tier of local government. My noble friend Baroness Dacre has raised the important issue of media literacy, and the government agrees. Media literacy helps people develop the skills needed to question information, to judge credibility and build resilience to misinformation and other forms of harmful content.

And on the 16th of March, DSIT published its Media Literacy Action Plan, a Whole of Government Plan for media literacy that sets out clear priorities for the next three years. By 2029, the action plan aims to improve critical engagement with online content, including recognition of mis and disinformation, and access to trusted information supported through schools, libraries and local services. And there's a great deal more going on in terms of the updated national curriculum. Following the Independent Curriculum and Assessment review.

So that is being there's active work going on in that space. To my noble friends, Baroness Royall Baroness Shah and the noble Lady Baroness Miller raised the very difficult issues of online harassment and the Online Act 2023 Safety Act establishes a framework of duties overseen and enforced by Ofcom in an electoral context. This framework means In-scope services must tackle illegal content where it amounts to existing offences, including offences such as incitement to violence, undue influence, foreign interference and false statements about a candidate's character.

Where anonymous abuse doesn't meet the threshold for illegality, the Act's user empowerment duties expected to come into force from 2027, require the largest services to make sure that they manage their interactions, including the ability to filter out content from Non-verified users. It is simply not acceptable for platforms to shrug their shoulders and shrug off their responsibility to tackle this, and our government is determined to tackle it in terms of supporting women and minorities in in politics. Issues raised by Baroness Dacre Baroness Goudie and Baroness O'Neill.

The current UK Parliament is the most diverse on record and sees a number of firsts, including the number of women elected to Parliament and the local government. Elections has risen. 40% of Labour members are now women. We don't have the overall figures on ethnic diversity of the House of Commons, but estimates available suggest there's been significant progress with that, and the government's plans will further strengthen women's role in public life, breaking down barriers to opportunity, tackling misogyny and creating more equal workplaces.

We will encourage better political representation, including by ensuring political parties publish diversity data through commencing section 106 of the Equality Act. But this is a whole system issue here. We've got to tackle the intimidation, the online abuse that people face, or we will just not encourage people to come into political life. The noble Lady Baroness O'Neill did issue a challenge to me about leadership of this project. Government will not tolerate the harassment and intimidation of those who serve in public life, and that's why the Defending Democracy Task Force is chaired by the security Minister, with a mandate directly from the Prime Minister, and she's bringing together departments, policing the Electoral Commission and our intelligence agencies to drive forward a coordinated and determined response to protect candidates and elected representatives from the threats, harassment and intimidation of representatives must not be treated as an inevitable part of public life.

So we need to make sure that this action goes forward. My Lords, this government is committed to a strong, cohesive and resilient communities and this will continue to be a priority for the remainder of this government. I thank hon. Members across the House for their valuable contributions to this important debate, and I hope noble Lords will continue to engage and work with us as we bring people together to restore pride in place and repair social cohesion. I want to close by thanking all those who work so hard to honour Jo's life with this indelible legacy of protecting, promoting and strengthening our democratic freedoms.

As Baroness Smith, my noble friend Baroness Hyde Baroness Goudie said powerfully, the Jo Cox Foundation has become a unifying force for good in our public and political life, and I want to end by thanking Jo Jo, our sister, her life to short. It was truly made a difference.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, what. A glorious way to. To finish. I thank. My noble friend.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My noble friend. The Minister, and to think that we are a unifying force. I think that's a wonderful way to finish. that's a wonderful way to finish. Thank you so much. But I'm also grateful to all noble Lords who grateful to all noble Lords who have contributed to this debate for sharing experiences, but also for their hopes and for expressing their fears and for the welcome, for the work of the Jo Cox Civility Commission and for our wider work.

Because, my Lords, I believe that strengthening our communities, addressing the epidemic epidemic of loneliness and nurturing respect in civility in politics, they are all inextricably linked, and they are the way that we have to address our challenge in making a more resilient society. But notwithstanding the divisions and difficulties in our communities and our country, there is always hope. And there are so many great things, so, so much positive action in our communities. And I, like everyone else, I just love the catalogue of
13:40
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon Portrait Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Labour)
-
-
positivity, which is going to go on my wall as well, my Lords. In fact, I might print it out and circulate I might print it out and circulate it to all noble Lords who participated in this debate. It's real positive action that. But it's also uplifting that across the chamber today, where quite often we disagree agreeably. And that's fine as it should be today. We have as it should be today. We have agreed on on all the points of this debate.

And that, I think, is a matter of strength. We have all shown a great determination to bring about change where it is needed, and it is needed if we are to ensure a healthy democracy and a resilient society in which everybody feels safe. To participate, we must hold firm to Joe's words. We must act. But I will end on a lighter note, and I would encourage all noble Lords to participate to join in a great get together this weekend, and perhaps in the next ten days, to go and raise a glass to Joe in one of our bars where they are serving great

**** Possible New Speaker ****

get together beer. Yeah. Thank you, my Lords. The question.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question. Is that this motion be agreed to, as many as are of that opinion will as many as are of that opinion will say content of the contrary, not content. the contents have it question for short debate, question for short debate, treatment and research into severe myalgic encephalomyelitis. Baroness Scott of Needham Market.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Scott of Needham Market. My Lords, I'm grateful. To. Have secured time for. This debate on. The treatment of and.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Research into. Severe ME. I'm particularly grateful to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm particularly grateful to Action for ME, whose work with those living with ME and for their advocacy to improve care and advocacy to improve care and treatment and understanding has been tireless. Someone very close been tireless. Someone very close to me has ME, and I know from our personal experience what so many other families know, that ME isn't other families know, that ME isn't just a matter of policy documents, clinical pathways, or departmental responsibilities. ME is about lives changed beyond recognition.

It's about people who were active, engaged, ambitious, and full of plans, who suddenly find that the most ordinary of tasks become impossible. ME is a complex, chronic and disabling condition which affects multiple systems in the body, characterised by debilitating fatigue, which doesn't improve with rest, cognitive dysfunction, pain, hypersensitivity to light, sound and movement. Even the most minimal activity can cause a serious worsening of symptoms in some people. Around 1.35 million people in the UK are estimated to be living with ME, although the true number may well be higher because of underdiagnosis and limited research, around 1 in 4 of those with ME are severely affected.

And to be clear what that means, it means they are housebound or bedbound, unable to carry out daily independent activities and are totally reliant on others for personal care. Those with very severe ME may have extreme symptoms are dependent on full time care, many are unable to process or tolerate food and are dependent on nutritional and hydration support. And we need to be clear about the scale and the seriousness of this. There have been some welcome developments with regard to ME recently.

The government's delivery plan on ME CFS, published in July last year, was an important step, and it finally recognises the needs of people with ME, and has signalled a greater willingness to address an illness which has been neglected for so long. But that recognition welcome, though it is, is not delivery. In March this year, the Department of Health and Social Care confirmed that work to explore a specialist NHS service for people with severe ME will not begin until at least April 2027.

So that's not the delivery of the service. It's simply the exploration of one. Now, for many illnesses, a delay of a year would be troubling. But for people with very severe ME, it may be devastating, leading to further deterioration in their health and, crucially, signals to them that once again, their illness is being forgotten. In practice, the delay will mean that patients continue to be passed between services that simply don't know what to do or, even worse, are being harmed by care, which is totally inappropriate to their needs.

Recent prevention of future deaths reports into the deaths of Maeve Boothby O'Neill and Sarah Lewis raised serious concerns about the
13:45
13:45
Baroness Scott of Needham Market Portrait Baroness Scott of Needham Market (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
of us, and I am sure, also weighs heavily on the Minister. And these reports make it clear that it's not just a question of future improvement, but as a question of patient safety. Now more deaths patient safety. Now more deaths from ME must be prevented. I know the Minister will say the delivery plan is a starting point and I accept that. But it is sadly a plan without funding timelines or accountability. And it risks becoming just another document that people living with ME are told to welcome whilst their daily reality remains unchanged with regards to people with severe ME, I would like the government to set out what interim support will be available for these patients before the exploration on the work for a specialised service begins in April next year.

We need clear interim measures, dedicated accountability within the department and within the NHS, and proper co-design with people who, with severe and very severe ME, with their families, their carers and with the charities which support them. There's also the question of research. I do welcome the government's recent announcement to invest £4.75 million to enable the sequence ME and long Covid study to completely sequence the whole genomes of the 6000 ME patients already collected. But ME remains significantly under-researched when compared with its prevalence, its severity and its economic impact.

So for comparison, the UK spends 20 times less on ME research compared to multiple sclerosis, despite the fact that ME is twice as prevalent, private investment has historically been limited because of the lack of established biomarkers and an underdeveloped clinical research pipeline. And this is precisely why Lord Doyle why the government needs to act. There is an opportunity here for the UK to lead in post infectious disease research, with ME as a central part of that agenda. I and Action for ME call on the government to commit to accelerating biomedical research into ME through the life sciences sector by 2027, and this should include targeted support for diagnostics, biomarkers, treatment development, clinical trials, and research into severe and very severe ME.

The proposed innovation and Research duty in the NHS modernisation Bill provides a clear opportunity to strengthen that commitment. There is a very practical problem with data at present, poor coding and inconsistent diagnosis means the NHS does not have a reliable picture of how many people have ME where they are, how severe their illness is or what support they need. And my Lords, this makes proper service planning almost impossible and it makes it too easy for people with ME particularly severe and very severe to remain invisible to the system.

And they're left without adequate and safe care. I'm very conscious that there are excellent clinicians, researchers, carers and voluntary organisations doing everything they can to support people with me, and my criticism is not at all of those individuals, but of a system that has not given those with ME especially severe ME the services and the care they need. So I'd like to finish with a number of questions for the Minister. First of all, could the Minister outline what interim support will be put in place with for people with very severe ME before April next year, would the Minister consider setting up an expert advisory panel on severe ME who can give guidance to hospitals when they admit severe ME patients? Would the department look at providing clear nutritional guidance for patients with severe ME? Perhaps the department could think about establishing a remote virtual ME clinic along the lines of virtual wards.

Will the government commit to accelerating biomedical research into ME, including research into severe and very severe ME? And finally, how will the government ensure that the delivery plan is backed by clear accountability, funding timelines and local commissioning duties? My Lords, people with ME have waited far too long. First of all to be believed. And now for research and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

for treatment. To make a very short

**** Possible New Speaker ****

To make a very short intervention in. This debate. And I'd like to thank the noble Lady, Baroness Scott, for introducing what I believe is a very important debate. As she has very important debate. As she has already pointed out, an estimated 1.35 million people across the United Kingdom are living with ME, and many of those are suffering, severely affected and unable to carry out their daily activities. Others take for granted and therefore require significant support, with personal care also
13:50
Lord McCrea of Magherafelt and Cookstown Portrait Lord McCrea of Magherafelt and Cookstown (Democratic Unionist Party)
-
-
acknowledging the proper level of care services are is inconsistent across the United Kingdom, leaving across the United Kingdom, leaving those in need with major gaps in provision causing serious deterioration in their personal well-being. Therefore, can I join in asking the noble Lady the in asking the noble Lady the question as was already asked, can the noble Lady, the Minister, tell the noble Lady, the Minister, tell the House what interim support will be provided for people with severe ME, bearing in mind the delay to the expiration of the nationally commissioned service until April 2027, I do believe that ME requires a rather.

Remains significantly under-researched considering how prevalent it is within society. Therefore, can the noble Ladies Department, the Minister's Department, take action to accelerate ME research, thereby gathering the necessary evidence base for better care? The dignity of many suffering from severe ME depends upon appropriate services across the UK, and I trust that this short. To be. It highlights the importance of the issue and I wholeheartedly support the noble Lady Baroness Boycott in her debate today.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, may I congratulate my noble friend Baroness Scott of Needham Market on her very moving Needham Market on her very moving speech. She very comprehensively covered the major issues that are covered the major issues that are before patients with ME. My Lords, the future deaths report into the death of Maeve Boothby O'Neill death of Maeve Boothby O'Neill emphasised that there is no known cure into myalgic encephalomyelitis, cure into myalgic encephalomyelitis, not only no cure, but no known cause, no known reason why some are susceptible to developing ME.

No known reason why 1 in 4 sufferers develops severe problems. It was clear that despite three periods in
13:52
Baroness Walmsley Portrait Baroness Walmsley (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
hospital, the NHS was unable to reverse Maeve's malnutrition and reverse Maeve's malnutrition and sadly, she died. One might think that apart from lots more research that apart from lots more research into causes, prevention, diagnosis and effective treatment, there is nothing that can be done to care nothing that can be done to care for sufferers appropriately. But there is. I noted that in a recent there is. I noted that in a recent survey by Action for ME, only 10.8% of respondents with severe or very severe ME felt supported by the NHS.

I began to wonder what good looks like, so I looked at the nice guidelines and there it was. But I recently heard from a carer from a severe of a severe ME patient. She said this quote there is almost no help available on the NHS for patients of this severity. We waited six months for an NHS specialist appointment. The consultation lasted ten minutes. Over the phone. The consultant, whose primary speciality was diabetes, reviewed blood tests, said there were normal and suggested my partner take a multivitamin.

The clinic was disbanded the following day due to the consultant's retirement, with no handover to an alternative service. Our experience with primary care has been equally concerning. Most GPS we've encountered have little understanding of severe ME, how profoundly disabling it can be or best practice for care. As just one example, a GP recently suggested to me that my partner tried talking therapies when he's unable to tolerate sound. So my first question to the Minister therefore, does the government know how many ME services are implementing the Nice guidelines, and if not, what is being done to find out and what is being done to support those who are not implementing the Nice guidance? In order to do so, obviously, we need to take several steps back from the quality of care to find out how this disease develops.

Clearly, the government should commit to accelerating biomedical research into ME, including the severe and very severe conditions. This should include targeted funding for diagnostics, biomarkers, treatment development, clinical trials and other post infectious disease research, as my noble friend demanded. But there are also off label low risk interventions, including cannabis based medicines, which patients may be willing to try but can't get access to them on the NHS. ME remains significantly under-researched relevant to its prevalence, as we have just heard, severe sufferers cannot work, often from an early age.

Those who are bedbound require constant care at home, also limiting the economic activity of their carers. Improving economic evidence is important as it encourages grant making decisions better. Cost of illness data would help demonstrate the wider social and economic impact of ME, including costs to the NHS, social care, welfare system, families and carers, and the wider economy. State funded research into this would pump prime investment by charities, academics and pharmaceutical companies. It sends a message that ME matters.

The condition is increasingly being understood within the broader field of post infectious conditions, such as long Covid, but we must avoid the danger that the two conditions could be confused. However, I do welcome the announcement of a £1.4 million nice research programme to explore the cost effectiveness of existing health care for ME and long Covid to improve the quality of care. Major UK research studies, including DecodeME, Lord Ashcombe and sequence ME in long Covid, are helping to build momentum, so there is now an opportunity, as my noble friend said, for government to position the UK as a leader in post infectious disease research with ME right at the heart of it.

So I ask the Minister, is there a coherent plan for a broad range of research to cover all aspects of ME, or is it a bit here and a bit there? Are we lagging behind other countries and losing an important economic opportunity? We will also need targeted support to translate biomedical science into commercially viable diagnostics and treatments. In this context, a recent report from your Lordships Science and Technology Committee into the need for more support for science based companies trying to scale up is certainly worth a read.

It's called, quote, Bleeding to Death. The Science and Technology Growth emergency, unquote. In other situations, there has been successful repurposing of pharmaceutical interventions developed for other diseases. Dexamethasone was an example of this during the Covid pandemic, and it certainly saved lives. There is a new funding opportunity for niHr Award focussed on evaluating repurposed pharmaceutical interventions, and I wonder whether these grants might be applied to treat post-acute infection syndromes and associated conditions, including ME. Can the Minister say whether there has been any progress with this? Finally, we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to do something for ME patients.

Now, the sensory overload suffered by some sufferers means that they must restrict their stimulus by lying in a quiet, dark room, and their care

**** Possible New Speaker ****

needs to be physically Be gentle. This means the environment in which care is environment in which care is delivered is as critical to their health outcomes as the treatment health outcomes as the treatment itself. The current definition of patient information in the NHS patient information in the NHS modernisation Bill risks creating a significant safety blind spot. significant safety blind spot. While the single patient record is welcome. It's designed to consolidate a patient's medical history. Current guidance omits the contextual clinical data, providing accommodations to make services accessible to all patients without formal, recorded and transferable data on reasonable accommodations.

These patients face preventable harm. Wasted clinical resources when no sensory adjustments mean that appointments fail and having to advocate for their safety needs at every new touchpoint. By amending the definition of patient information to include reasonable accommodations, we could ensure that the SPR acts as a true safety net, not just for ME patients, but for those with learning or communication difficulties, too. Including this provision does not merely add data. It formalises the duty of care ensures clinical safety and embeds equity into the very architecture of the future.

NHS digital infrastructure. Will the government accept an amendment to correct this omission?
14:00
Lord Evans of Rainow Portrait Lord Evans of Rainow (Conservative)
-
-
My Lords. >> I thank. >> The noble Baroness, Lady. >> Scott for. >> Securing this important. >> Debate. >> And I join others in paying

**** Possible New Speaker ****

And I join others in paying tribute to the patients, families, clinicians, researchers and charities have worked tirelessly to charities have worked tirelessly to improve understanding of myalgic encephalomyelitis. For too long, people living with this condition have faced scepticism and inadequate support, while significant challenges remain. It is right to acknowledge that progress has been made. There is now a much greater recognition that ME is a serious and often profoundly, profoundly debilitating condition, requiring appropriate clinical care and support.

We on these benches welcome the publication of the ME Delivery Plan in 2025. Many of the origins of that work lie in the commitments made by the previous conservative government in 2022 to develop a cross-government approach to ME, and it is encouraging that the plan contains a broad range of actions across health services and educational research. We also welcome research reports that a substantial number of those actions are complete or in progress. However, publication of a plan is only the beginning.

What matters to patients is whether they experience tangible improvements in their daily lives. The plan contains 44 actions for patients, and charities have raised understandable concerns about how delivery will be monitored in practice. Who will ultimately be accountable for implementation and how responsibilities will be managed. As NHS England function. Transfer into the Department of Health and Social Care. I therefore hope the Minister can tell the House today when the promised progress report will be published, and who will be responsible for ensuring delivery across government and the NHS.

My Lords. Nowhere are these questions more urgent than those living with severe and very severe ME. These are often the patients with the greatest need to advocate for themselves. It is therefore concerning that the only delayed action within the delivery plan relates to consideration of specialised services for this group, with the decision now not expected until April 2027. The evidence presented by charities and campaigners illustrates why this matters. Preliminary findings from Action for ME recent survey suggest that many people with severe and very severe ME are unable to access existing specialist services because they are simply too unwell to attend them.

Large numbers report receiving little or no ongoing support from either specialist services or primary care. While many face serious challenges in meeting basic needs, including nutrition. This matters not only because of the immediate impact on the patient's quality of life, but because early intervention and appropriate support can prevent longer term deterioration. If people have access to advice, treatment system management and practical support at an earlier stage, there is a greater chance of helping them maintain their independence and remain connected to education or employment where appropriate.

Delays in accessing support can leave people becoming progressively more unwell, making recovery and participation in everyday life considerably harder. That is why timely and effective services are so important, not only for those who are already severely affected, but for those at risk of reaching that point. My Lords. It is also important to recognise that ME disproportionately affects women. Evidence consistently suggests that women are significantly more likely to be diagnosed with ME than men. Can the Minister therefore say what assessment the government have made of the reasons behind this disparity, and whether the needs of women living with ME are more are being significantly considered as the delivery plan is implemented? Recent prevention of future deaths reports have also highlighted serious concerns regarding the care available to some of the most severely affected patients.

The government have stated the Integrated Care Board remain responsible for commissioning appropriate services in the meantime. Can the Minister therefore explain what assessment has been made of? Current provision for severe and very severe ME, where a significant variation exists across the country, and what interim support will be available before any decision on a nationally commissioned service is reached in 2027? My Lords, we must also not lose sight of the critical importance of research. We welcome the support provided for the DecodeME survey.

Its early findings identify potential genetic links involving the immune and nervous systems, represent an encouraging step forward in understanding the biological mechanisms underlying this condition. Yet ME remains significantly under-researched relative to its prevalence and impact. The government have rightly spoken about the UK's ambition to lead in life sciences and post infectious disease research. There is a strong case for ensuring that ME forms part of that agenda, including through support for research into diagnostics, biomarkers, treatments and clinical trials.

In closing, I ask the Minister three questions when will the government publish their next formal update on delivery of the ME ME plan? What interim support will be provided for people with severe and very severe ME before April 2022? Can she assure the House that the decision on specialised services will not be subject to further delay? Those living with ME have waited a long time to be heard. They deserve not only recognition

**** Possible New Speaker ****

and promises but also delivery. My Lords. I am. Most grateful to. The noble Lady, Baroness Scott,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The noble Lady, Baroness Scott, for securing a very important debate that matters so much to so debate that matters so much to so many, and for her very clear introduction of the matters before introduction of the matters before us. And I'm also grateful to all other noble Lords who have spoken other noble Lords who have spoken in this debate for their thoughtful
14:06
Baroness Merron Portrait Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)
-
-
and probing insights. And I can certainly say that I think the debate has underlined the profound debate has underlined the profound impact that myalgic encephalomyelitis, or as I refer to encephalomyelitis, or as I refer to it as ME CFS from now on, has on it as ME CFS from now on, has on those living with the condition, but also on their families, friends, but also on their families, friends, carers and communities. And noble Lords, I think, have spoken very movingly about the reality.

And I'm grateful for the welcomes across the House for a number of government actions. And I should say that I do recognise what noble Lords have described, which is to pick up a few points, a lack of awareness, variability in services. Also the stigma faced by those with ME CFS and the need to go further. We we do recognise all of that and it is also the case. The fact is, the system has not worked as it should for people.

But that is why early on, the government did prioritise publication of our final delivery plan on ME CFS, which we published in July of last year. And I can assure noble Lords that we work closely with those most impacted by the effects of this debilitating condition, including those with lived experience. And I, too, want to add my thanks to charities and campaigners for their work as well, because they have also given voice on this subject.

And we do want to ensure that patients are truly heard by a system that can respond to those voices, because historically that has not been the case. So the plan does set out a clear direction for improvement, and it does focus on three key ambitions boosting research, improving understanding and education, and also strengthening the care and support that people receive. And the noble Lady, Baroness Scott and the noble Lord, Lord Evans, raised a number of questions about funding, timelines and accountability, and I can confirm that the Department has overall responsibility for the progress against the final delivery plan.

And indeed, officials are actively tracking progress worth very much noticing that three quarters of the plan's actions have either been completed, commenced or are currently ongoing. And to the noble Lord, Lord Evans, an update on the delivery of the final delivery plan will be communicated next month. We do know, as has been spoken about, that a lack of research has meant that those with their means CFS s have been left understandably feeling undervalued, frustrated and overlooked.

And that is why the final delivery plan does commit to stimulating research, including through new funding opportunities, better support for researchers and also building capacity and research. And we have gone beyond the actions in the final delivery plan, as all noble Lords were good enough to reference by investing 4.75 million in sequence ME that will create the first high resolution genetic map that ME CFS. I believe this will offer new hope to patients, and it will pave the way for better diagnostics and future treatment, which, after all, is what we need.

All noble Lords asked for further commitment and to the points I've just made. I would also add that we are, as a government, investing in turbocharging clinical trials research. Key to this is enabling that new treatments get to patients faster and. The NIH has funded projects to explore the feasibility of a clinical trial for treatments. For me, CFS and other post-acute infection conditions as noble Lords have asked for. And of course, funding and support is available for researchers, and the Medical Research Council.

And the NIHR welcomes funding applications for research into ME, CFS and other. As I said, post-acute, infectious and infection conditions, but I would say that addressing gaps in knowledge and awareness around this condition is also absolutely crucial because people who live with ME and CFS have to be seen and feel seen, and they need to be reassured, and they need evidence that they're going to be taken seriously. So I'm glad to say that NHS England has developed an e-learning programme, which consists of four modules which seeks to improve the understanding of healthcare professionals and support them so they can provide the right care at the right time for those who need it, including for those with severe ME CFS experiences of care does, of course, but should not be inevitable.

But it does. We recognise it does vary widely because. But I believe that those with ME and CFS do deserve a high standard of care, no matter who they are or where they are. So we will seek to improve that through the development of a new template service specification for mild and moderate ME CFS, and that will expand to include a. The severe nature of the condition too, because the template will focus the minds and demonstrate to integrated care boards the ways in which Nice guidelines Nice guidelines can be implemented.

The I also. I think it's also key here that it will provide good practice examples for ICB so they can model their own services on where it is being successful. There is, as I said at the beginning, so much more to be done. We are working at pace to implement the final delivery plan, and we will work continually with stakeholders to make sure that it does meet the mark and the noble Lady, Baroness Scott. The noble Lord Lord McCrea, asked about interim support and we are.

Committed to not just considering a specialised service for those with the. A very serious version of the condition, but we're also exploring what preparatory work can be taken forward ahead of April next year, because we want to progress the work at pace. Once the transformation in respect of NHS England has been concluded. And yes, in the meantime we are considering a range of potential interim measures to support those with severe ME CFS further promotion of the e-learning modules that I referred to, making sure that they span very severe and severe ME CFS.

Alongside the recommendations that have been presented to government directly by patient groups and the noble Lady, Baroness Scott, asked about standing up an expert advisory panel. We don't currently have plans for such a panel. For those with severe ME CFS, but I can assure the noble Lady our engagement is very close with those experts from NHS England, with clinicians and experts in the charity section, in that we can develop a much broader approach to supporting patients with ME, CFS and.

The question about exploring whether a specialised service should be commissioned for very severe ME CFS. Any decision on whether this committee would be convened does remain at the discretion of the Secretary of State. We do to noble Lord, Lord Evans, very much welcome. Not welcome. Recognise that ME is more likely to affect women and it is also the case that early results from the DecodeME study has found that women with me, CFS, tend to have more symptoms and co-occurring conditions of men and yes, that will be taken into account.

So my Lords, once again, I'm most grateful to the noble Lady,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Baroness Scott, for her work and advocacy in this area. For the Minister's.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

For the Minister's. I did ask about what support is being given to those services that being given to those services that are unable to fulfil the Nice guidelines, and I also asked about the government's attitude to the government's attitude to including reasonable adjustments

**** Possible New Speaker ****

into the information on the single patient record. I'd be very pleased to take those two points away and to look at them, particularly the second, which is a very practical suggestion, and I'm grateful to the noble Lady, as ever, and I will

**** Possible New Speaker ****

gladly write to her. My Lords, I think it might be appropriate to take a short pause appropriate to take a short pause just to allow people to leave the Motion Motion for Motion for debate. Motion for debate. Child Motion for debate. Child poverty

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Motion for debate. Child poverty. hear. My Lords, it's a real pleasure to introduce this debate on the first UK wide child poverty strategy and strategy for England strategy and strategy for England since 2010, during which time child poverty has worsened, particularly deep child poverty. I am grateful deep child poverty. I am grateful for those to those taking part, and I hope the debate will provide an opportunity both to highlight some opportunity both to highlight some of the strategies strengths, but also to suggest where it might go further in tackling child poverty effectively.

One of its great strengths has been the task force's wide engagement with stakeholders, including in particular, parents and children with experience of poverty. Four of those parents involved in the Changing Realities Participatory project said in a foreword. We have experienced genuine listening and collaboration, and it's been encouraging to feel that our lived experience can and should influence policy decisions, and there is a commitment to continuing this engagement as part of the strategy's evaluation and development, which I'll return to. Although the strategy strategy document itself didn't mention children's rights, a subsequent child rights impact assessment published alongside a child friendly version of the strategy, emphasises from the outset development.

The development of the strategy has been guided by a children's rights approach, and that this will continue by involving children in monitoring its impact, which is very welcome. Another very positive aspect of the strategy document is its language and tone. It makes a very strong case for action on child poverty, starting with a Prime Minister's foreword, both a moral case and its importance as an economic and
14:19
14:20
Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour)
-
-
and indeed uses a term rather than what has become the pejorative language of welfare. The tone is a far cry from the dominant false far cry from the dominant false narrative of a ballooning welfare budget. A companion evidence pack budget. A companion evidence pack spells out how previous cuts mean that basic benefit levels are worth significantly less than in 20 1011, and how this has contributed to the worsening of child poverty. This lays the ground for the most important and welcome policy shift.

The total abolition of the heinous two child limit, which I won't dwell on because we've already debated it, other than to remind noble Lords that it represents a single most effective means of reducing child poverty at a stroke. Supported by modest real increases in the Universal Credit Standard allowance for the rest of this Parliament. According to the latest published official estimate. Abolition of the limit will reduce the number of children in poverty by 550,000 by 2030, and as many as 7.1 million children will be in gaining households, of whom 1.4 million are in deep material poverty.

Nevertheless, official projections suggest there will still be around 4 million children, 29% of all children in poverty. At the end of this parliament, and Barnardo's warns the depth and severity of poverty could worsen further. The challenge facing the government is a measure of the dire situation inherited from the previous government and, as a Resolution Foundation warns, the strategy is still working against economic forces and other policy choices that could weaken its impact. One such policy choice is the retention of the benefit cap, which is a key driver of deep poverty, especially among single parent families.

I know removal of the cap is not government policy, even though the evidence suggests its impact on employment has been pretty minimal. While the hardship caused is considerable, but at the very least I'd ask yet again for them to consider ways of mitigating its impact, including annual uprating of the threshold limits, according to CPAG, of which I'm honorary president. If they had been uprated in line with inflation since 2016, they would be 26% higher now. The other main Social Security omission is the failure to end the freeze of housing allowance, which aggravates poverty among families living in the private rented sector.

More generally, there's no hint of the further investment in Social Security that is needed if it's to provide for a decent life. Genuine security and a healthy diet, as argued by the Food Foundation. Yet analysis suggests that, as a record of the last Labour government showed, we can only get significant and lasting reduction in child poverty by investing in our social security system. The same analysis, published by case at the LSE, also shows that changes in parental employment, whilst important, will never deliver change to child poverty rates on the scale we need to see.

Remember, nearly three quarters of children in poverty live in working households. Certainly there are reforms that could ensure paid work is more effective in tackling child poverty, as recent recent analysis by action for children and the IPV IPV R demonstrates. But it will never be the silver bullet that some politicians suggest. One such reform that the government are very aware of is childcare. Of particular importance, again for single parent families. I-pr and action for Children's Research underlined just how important childcare is, both to finding and progressing in paid work, especially for mothers whose poverty is still inextricably, inextricably linked with that of their children.

And childcare is an important element in the holistic approach taken by the strategy. Other important elements include action on homelessness and the use of bed and breakfast accommodation, reduction in some of the costs of education crucial if every child is to achieve and thrive at school, including here, the very welcome extension of free school meals, improved maintenance provisions and strengthened local services, especially those prioritising prevention. These are aimed as much at reducing the impact of child poverty as its as its incidence, but are nevertheless welcome.

And here I wish attention could have been paid to how services are delivered. As the experience of poverty is worsened when service users feel they are not treated with dignity and respect, thereby worsening the stigma which continues to hurt people living in poverty. This is something that a human rights approach to poverty would address, as recognised in Scotland and Wales. The Council of Europe Commissioner on Human Rights, in warmly welcoming the strategy, argues that its implementation would be significantly strengthened by taking a human rights based approach.

The strategy recognises the important role played by local authorities, but in the words of resolve poverty, it will need to give greater consideration to how localities in England will be supported to develop and embed strong strategic responses to poverty, and ensuring that all localities are properly resourced and supported to deliver strategic anti-poverty activity. They would like to see the introduction of a requirement on localities to develop anti-poverty strategies. My Lords, another hole in the strategy concerns migrant children and families with no recourse to public funds, which includes child benefit.

The key bedrock of support for children. While its explicit recognition of this group of children and commitment to ensuring they receive the support they require, regardless of their immigration status are very welcome. It has ignored calls for easing the application of the NRPF rule, which can spell abject poverty for much of a child's childhood. Moreover, proposed reforms to the asylum and settlement rules are likely to worsen poverty amongst migrant children already at disproportionate risk of poverty. Sara, a refugee parent, in a recent blog, warned that any further limit on support for refugees would be devastating for my family.

My Lords, I look forward to the promised baseline report, which will give more detail about implementation and monitoring. Elaborating on what looks like a well thought out UN monitoring and evaluation framework. I don't know how much my noble friend can say about that, but today, but perhaps a few hints. And I was very encouraged by the written evidence from the departments for Education and Work and Pensions to the Select Committee inquiry, which stated the government has committed to maintain a core central child poverty team with cross-government oversight by Ministers.

Now, that wasn't my original understanding and I and others were a bit worried if future responsibility just lay with the DWP. So I wonder if my noble friend could say more about this. I hope the baseline report will say something about targets, or at least milestones in the name of accountability and transparency, as called for by a wide range of organisations. There would be a way of demonstrating to the to the electorate the government's intent and their belief in the strategy.

A point that I had hoped the noble Lord Lord Bird would be able to expand on. But unfortunately he hasn't got to his place, so he won't be able to. With regard to monitoring, there was an exchange between the chair of the Social Mobility Commission and the Work and Pensions and Education Select committees. In an oral evidence session which reminded me that the Social mobility. Social Mobility Commission started life as a Child Poverty Commission. This made me think that perhaps the resurrection of the latter.

With input from those with lived experience, would be the ideal independent body to monitor the strategy. With its reports published and debated annually in Parliament. And I'd welcome my noble friend's thoughts on that. My Lords, the strategy document describes it as just the first step on our road to ending child poverty, emphasised by the Education Secretary, who presented it to the Commons as a strong start. This debate provides an opportunity to think about further steps, how we best build on that strong start.

There's a lot of talk in politics at present about the need for hope, which was we heard more of in the first debate today, particularly when so many are struggling with the cost of living crisis. When I hear senior Ministers talking about tackling child poverty as this government's moral mission, it gives me hope. And more importantly, it offers hope to the millions of children and parents who remain in poverty despite the measures already taken by the government. And so I'll finish with more words from the foreword from parents involved in changing realities.

This strategy begins the work of lifting the weight of poverty off the shoulders of millions of families. With some of the changes, families like ours may start to breathe again, not just survive, but live with dignity. We'd all like to feel secure knowing that if something breaks or a bill goes up, we won't be pushed into a crisis. More than anything, we want our children to have opportunities without us constantly having to say, no, not this time. But we must not get complacent and stop there.

All of us owe it to the children who are who are relying on decision makers to put them first and ensure we are doing everything we can to propel our children into a future

**** Possible New Speaker ****

filled with hope and not despair. I beg to move. Yeah, yeah. Question is that this motion be

**** Possible New Speaker ****

agreed to. My Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness on securing this debate. I think it's very timely recognising the ongoing challenges that families in this country face. Issues on inflation, a reduction in the number of jobs available, an the number of jobs available, an increase in unemployment and indeed the issue tackling NEETs. And that is a real strategic challenge for our country to face into. And while we're talking about children today,
14:31
14:31
Baroness Coffey Portrait Baroness Coffey (Conservative)
-
-
and expand the number of hours that they have. It's all well and good having 30 hours, 38 weeks a year having 30 hours, 38 weeks a year when the schools are sitting. That doesn't help when you've still got that job in the summer or or over Christmas. And that is the sort of strategic challenges we really do strategic challenges we really do need to face. Into. My three years at DWP are one of which I'm very proud and working with my noble proud and working with my noble friend Baroness Stedman-Scott.

We did do a lot of good to try and help people get out of poverty, and one of the battles I had somewhat was about the definition of poverty. And the British Social Attitudes Survey is very clear. People are very clear. They don't agree that getting 60% of the median income automatically means you're poor. They do prefer, as the noble barrister is referring to, the concept of deeper poverty. And so that is something where lots of lobbying organisations will continue to try and use relative poverty as being the only way we consider it.

And so I was slightly bemused that after, during Covid, relative poverty fell. It fell because it's a statistic, but it didn't reflect how people felt. Now, today, Secretary of State for DWP, as we learned in the message he exchanged with, I think he's still Lord Mandelson, but is too many MPs are just asking what taxes can be put up in order to pay for more benefits for others. He said they are asking the wrong questions and he is right in that.

But that's why I was concerned somewhat with the child poverty strategy, which seemed to continue to focus on how we the more cash benefits or other benefits are the way to address actually and not address a statistical change, but not address the strategic change. Now, inevitably, I think 60% of the median income last year was £22,370. There's no surprise that single parent homes, a lot more are in relative poverty. And we had a debate the other week about child maintenance, and I don't want to rehearse all of that, but I will continue to refresh one plea that those parents, it's mainly men who are not contributing to their children income, either because they're on benefits or just not paying anything.

We need to make sure they are top priority in their local job centre. On getting a job. Really need to stress that in terms of thinking about taxes. In the latest British Social Attitudes survey, only 29% of the population were happy to increase taxes in order to do this. And yet that is exactly what has happened with removing the two child benefit. Now, I'm conscious for many peers this has been a long term campaign, and I accept that they disagreed with what we did.

But I have to say, we did do that with a purpose of reflecting that the welfare system is intended to be a hand up, is intended to support people really desperately in need. And yet we're now in a situation where due to other factors, for example, everybody on Universal Credit who has children gets free school meals. That's difficult when you know that 220,000 households with children on Universal Credit are actually earning over getting over £40,000 in household income. It's difficult when the warm home discount is being expanded to every recipient of Universal Credit actually means that the smaller cohort that used to get the money using more energy, more with children actually get less discount.

Now as a consequence in cash terms. So it's all these little changes that start to happen. And all these extra things mean like used to happen with tax credits where you would be almost insane to work a minute, more than 16 hours per week unless you work full time because you would lose money. And now families are very carefully and perfectly rationally adjusting their hours, not moving to full time work because they will lose out. These are strategic problems that we need to face into as a country.

My Lords, I've finished on this particular thing. Thinking of debt. Debt is a real challenge. I pay credit to John Glenn in the last government who introduced the breathing space approach. Really good initiative. I hope it gets extended even further. But one thing that happened in the child poverty strategy, I think it's in the child poverty strategy, is that debt advice would be included in neighbourhood health. So that approach to helping people in the most recent in the framework that's recently been published, there is no mention of debt advice services to be commissioned.

I hope the Minister can go back to health and think about that. I think this House is united. We desperately want fewer children in poverty. Ideally, no child in poverty. While the statistic. There almost certainly will be. But let's do our best to make sure every child has the best opportunity going forward.
14:36
Lord Bishop of Leicester Portrait The Lord Bishop of Leicester (Bishops)
-
-
Hear, hear. Baroness Lister for securing this debate and want to thank her for her tireless work in addressing her tireless work in addressing child poverty. Like many others, I welcome the publication of the government's child Poverty Strategy and was delighted by the government's decision to abolish the two child limit on Universal Credit. But also, like others, I felt the government's missed the opportunity to deliver some quick wins measures which would not require legislation, yet would make a tangible difference to children's lives.

Baroness Lister has already mentioned a number of these measures, but I wish to focus on just one today. That's of auto enrolment for free school meals. On the face of it, a very modest proposal, and yet one that I believe would have profound positive consequences for some of the most disadvantaged children in this country. Around a quarter of a million children in England who are eligible for free school meals are not enrolled to receive them. That is approximately 1 in 10 of all those who should be benefiting from this scheme.

In the North East, it is 1 in 5. My Lords, the entitlement exists, but it is not having its full potential impact, and there is a substantial body of evidence, including a major cost benefit analysis conducted by PwC for Impact on Urban Health, which has demonstrated that free school meals improve concentration in the classroom, boost attendance, raise attainment and improve long term health outcomes. Yet, some of the children most in need of this benefit are missing out. This is because under the present system, families must apply for free school meals.

They must navigate forms, eligibility checks and in many local authorities, repeat the process each time circumstances change. This creates administrative barriers, stigma and confusion, particularly my Lords. For parents with limited digital access, or for those for whom English is an additional language, or for
14:44
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page