International Women’s Day

Baroness Goudie Excerpts

Friday 6th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, it gives me great pleasure to congratulate my great friend Geeta Nargund—my noble friend Lady Nargund—on her maiden speech and on joining this House. We were brought together by one great friend of all of ours in this House, Margaret McDonagh, and every day we are very sad that she is not here with us to tell us what we should be doing. We miss her greatly. We were also brought together by my daughter in law, Vanessa Elliott, who is a consultant at Saint George’s; both she and my noble friend worked with Margaret when she was not well. Both of them were fantastic to her, and I think everybody in this House should know that.

Among other things, my noble friend is a great campaigner. She not only campaigned for better vaccinations in this country, but—for those who do not know—she campaigned during Covid to ensure that people had the right vaccinations not only for Covid. Her work with universities is enormous, as pro-chancellor of Portsmouth University, and on women’s health at City St George’s, University of London.

However, my noble friend’s main work, which she is really well known for, is her research on IVF. The IVF treatment that she has founded and worked on is helping people not just in this country but in African and other countries who never had such a choice, or who thought that it would be available. Through Geeta’s great work, this has been made available and she continues with that work. She will continue to give us hassle on this issue in this House, among other things. I thank her for being here with us—it is great.

Today, as we know, is International Women’s Day. I would like to thank everybody for having this debate and for our leadership on what we are doing for women. I declare my interest as a founder of, and an adviser and ambassador to, the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security. As we know, there are more women than ever today suffering the trials of war, and it is women who bear the brunt of war as we sit here today. We think of what they are going through and what they are having to do to look after their families in this situation.

The UN’s theme for International Women’s Day this year is “Rights. Justice. Action. For ALL women and girls”, and it is a theme I welcome as a strong reminder that rights do not maintain themselves; they depend on services, enforcement and political choices, and on us standing up for women and girls around the planet whose inherent rights are unfulfilled every single day.

I wanted to take time today to reflect on developments for women and girls over the last year. To me, three developments stand out. First, there is the squeeze on global sexual and reproductive health programmes. The United States Government have historically been the largest donor Government for family planning, but the drastic pivot from USAID that froze and then cancelled most global family planning projects in 2025 is still seeking to eliminate that funding for 2026.

We have already seen the consequences of that decision. A review led by the Clinton Health Access Initiative found that after USAID ended its reproductive health work in early 2025, partner countries faced funding and supply chain disruption, and women and girls found that their preferred contraceptive methods were sometimes unavailable. One family planning provider in West Africa told the initiative:

“It is heartbreaking to turn women away when I know they came from far distances just for this service”.


The UNFPA reported that in 2025, funding cuts forced more than 1,000 UNFPA-supported clinics and mobile health teams to shut down or come close to closure, and more than 250 safe spaces for women and girls to close. As the UNFPA stated, the impact is clear as these services are the front line of maternal care, providing midwives, post-rape treatment, supplies of pain relief, and emergency delivery kits.

Secondly, I must draw our attention back to Afghanistan, as one of our colleagues has already done this morning. Afghanistan remains the only country where secondary and higher education is forbidden to girls and women, and UNESCO and UNICEF estimate that 2.2 million adolescent girls are banned from secondary education. UNICEF has warned that in a context where women and girls can often be medically treated only by women, denying girls education today means denying women healthcare tomorrow. The GDP of Afghanistan, when it is eventually able to get going again, will be devastated without women being educated. The 2025-26 Women, Peace and Security Index—produced by the Georgetown Institute for Women, Peace and Security, and partners—ranks 181 countries. It finds that global progress is stalling and ranks Afghanistan last. I urge the Government to make use of this valuable document, which is produced annually.

Thirdly, I want to point out that international co-operation is still possible. In October 2025, France hosted the Fourth Ministerial Conference on Feminist Foreign Policies, bringing together participants from 55 countries. It concluded with a joint declaration signed by 31 states, reaffirming commitments to gender equality, and the United Kingdom joined the Feminist Foreign Policy Group alongside countries such as Morocco, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Turning to the United Kingdom, I welcome the decision to remove the universal credit two-child benefit cap limit from April 2026. Government analysis suggests that this could mean 450,000 fewer children living on relatively low incomes by 2030. We all know that child poverty is not gender-neutral and that it lands first on mothers and carers, especially single mothers.

I also welcome the renewal of the women’s health strategy and the decision to include menopause questions in national health checks, which are expected to benefit nearly 5 million women. I welcome menopause action plans becoming part of employment policy by being mandatory from 2027; this is a huge move forward for all women and their families.

Finally, we must confront the fastest-growing threat to women’s equality: technology-facilitated abuse. Ofcom reports that 98%—as we heard the other night, it is even more—of intimate images reported to the Revenge Porn Helpline are of women and that 99% of deepfake intimate image abuse depicts women. The National Police Chiefs’ Council has warned that sexual abuse and deepfakes are thought to have increased in prevalence by nearly 2,000% between 2019 and 2024. The Government have brought into force the offence of creating or requesting non-consensual intimate images and are treating it as a priority offence online, but we need enforcement, victim support and platform accountability.

International Women’s Day is, of course, a celebration of the achievements of women every day, but it is also a reminder that rights require services, justice requires access and action requires political will. In reality, this takes place in government, in budgets, in diplomacy and in how we choose to keep women and girls safe.

Employment Rights Bill

Baroness Goudie Excerpts

Report stage
Monday 14th July 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Cromwell (CB)]

I will speak very briefly on the three amendments. I am very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady O’Grady, for namechecking me among the illustrious supporters.

First, on government Amendment 46, I have been going on about NDAs and whistleblowers for a long time over the years and it is great to finally get to a day where we have legislation that is actually gripping it. I agree with the reservations of the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, about it applying to workers only—but, my goodness, this is a substantial beachhead into a problem that is long overdue for settlement.

I support Amendment 96. The unfair dismissal aspect is so obvious that I do not think it needs any words from me. In particular, I am interested in supporting the duty to investigate side of it. I often say that Parliament loves to make laws and then never resources the enforcement of them. Organisations love to make policies about whistleblowing—to coin a phrase, “big, beautiful policies” about whistleblowing. The trouble is that, when it comes to somebody actually trying to whistleblow in practice, the reception is very often the three Ds: delay, dismiss and deny.

This amendment gives the opportunity to remove something that is not only unfair to the individual employee but is corrosive of business efficiency and a betrayal of investors’ interests in whatever the business or organisation is. I remind the House that whistleblowing is not just about sexual harassment, vitally important though that aspect is. It can be about criminality of a whole range of kinds which, if not revealed, is very corrosive to business and damaging to investors, who take a keener interest than some people realise in whistleblowers. To bring a duty to investigate will be a great step towards resisting the temptation and ability to cover up issues brought up by whistleblowers.

Finally, on Amendment 95, the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, has very long championed the office of the whistleblower. For all the reasons we have discussed tonight, it is of benefit to whistleblowers and organisations to have this office put in place. There is such a lot of work to do in terms of their knowledge and support, with so much need out there. I do not think I need say any more; I am just very happy to once more support the enthusiasm of the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, for the office of the whistleblower.

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

I very much thank the Minister and her officers for all the time they have given us over the last year in being able to get this clause on the statutes tonight. I also thank my colleagues in the other place, in particular Lou Haigh and the Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner, for the work they have done and encouragement they have given us in this House to continue with the campaign.

I also thank the Diversity Project and Zelda Perkins’s group for their work with us over a longer time than we have today. Non-disclosure agreements need to be properly regulated and not permitted to continue in the way they have been, with their chilling effects.

This is especially so when the disclosure ban applies to the context of an employee and an employer and relates to harassment, bullying or discrimination, including impartiality and sexual harassment, which is one of the worst things that can happen to anybody and ruins their life completely. I am really grateful to everybody who has been kind enough to work with me over these months and years.

[Baroness Ramsey of Wall Heath (Lab)]

My Lords, I speak on behalf of my noble friend Lady Kennedy, who, due to recent surgery, cannot be here this evening, but also on behalf of other women around the House, all of whom have pressed for amendments on the issue of NDAs being used to silence women who experience sexual harassment in the workplace.

I know that my noble friend Lady Kennedy worked closely with the courageous Zelda Perkins on her campaign to change the law. We all want to pay tribute to our noble friend the Minister for the vital role that she has played in bringing the Government on board to change the law with the amendments—our warm congratulations to the Minister.

Employment Rights Bill

Baroness Goudie Excerpts

Committee stage
Monday 19th May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Morrissey (Con)]

My Lords, it is telling that so many amendments have been tabled from across the Committee for discussion. Amendments 98, 101, 101A and 101C all aim to restrict the use of non-disclosure agreements in sexual harassment cases. There has already been considerable debate in the other place on this as well, led by Louise Haigh MP. I hope and believe that the strength of feeling and the rationale behind it are encouraging the Minister to consider tabling the Government’s own amendment to the Bill. The Bill provides such a wonderful opportunity to address a practice that has gone on for far too long, as others have talked about. Of course, this is not an academic issue. It has a real cost and causes real detriment to people’s lives and, of course, to their careers.

I speak in support of all these amendments and have added my name specifically to the one tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, because it sets out clear limitations on the silence that has, to date, been able to be bought through NDAs, while enabling workers to request an NDA, since that can help them move on with their lives, but under only certain conditions, including receiving “independent legal advice”. I want to clarify my additional Amendment 101A, which seeks to strengthen this provision by requiring employers to contribute to legal fees. We know that fees put many women off seeking advice: it seems very daunting, and then they have to pay for it at seemingly unlimited cost. I note that Ireland, which has been mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Kramer, has already adopted this practice of allowing NDAs for sexual harassment cases only in what are described as “excepted circumstances”. In those cases, employers are required to cover the employee’s reasonable legal costs.

I have suggested quite a specific figure, although I stress that it is the principle rather than any specific amount that is important. I note that I came up with that figure after consulting lawyers specialising in these matters. The key is that such costs would be borne only by those employers that have reason to enter into such agreements. Firms with good cultures that do not have sexual harassment cases will not need to enter into NDAs. They will have nothing to pay—another incentive to encourage companies to prevent harassment occurring in the first place.

As has been mentioned by others, those of us who have tabled our various amendments and supported the views of others will be very pleased to consolidate our suggestions into one amendment that is simple and workable, and will achieve the goal of limiting the use of NDAs so that they are not misused but used to help victims move on. I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts and again urge the Government to use this opportunity to finally end a practice that has gone on far too long and been completely unchecked.

We all know about the #MeToo scandal and the causes célèbres, but until the noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of The Shaws, talked about her experience as chair of inquiries and explained that the ones we hear about are, effectively, the tip of the iceberg, I would have said that we do not actually know much about the scale of the problem. No data is reported at present on the use of NDAs for sexual harassment and, of course, the nature of these agreements means that there are no revelations about the underlying issues. From personal experience, I have heard from women working in finance who sometimes use a third party to tell me their story because they are keen to see something done about it. I can only surmise that there must be many more in other sectors who do not come forward.

My final conclusion is: enough is enough. I urge the Government to seize the opportunity afforded by the Bill to restrict this misuse of NDAs.

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, I support Amendments 98, 101 and 101A, and Amendment 101C, which is in my name. Also, I support my noble friends Lady O’Grady, Lady Kennedy and Lady Chakrabarti, and the noble Baronesses, Lady Morrissey and Lady Kramer, and the work they have done on these issues over the years. I thank Members of the other place for their support, including the meeting they called for us with Zelda Perkins last week, which was really helpful, and the organisations outside that have written to us all over a long period asking for support on this issue.

These amendments are all about harassment, which, surely, we are all against. If not, it is about time we were. Harassment includes sexual harassment and, surely, we are all very concerned about sexual harassment. It is obvious that we cannot combat sexual harassment effectively, which is what is required, if it is hidden from the light of day by being covered up by, or on behalf of, the perpetrator. We know that perpetrators get away and get jobs in other places. It is pernicious that all too often it is covered up and deliberately hidden from sight by so-called non-disclosure agreements. The title does not sound as objectionable as cover-up agreements, but that is precisely what they are. They are cover-up agreements, in intention and effect. They impose a positive obligation not to disclose what should otherwise be disclosed. They are pernicious, and bad apples in character. They perpetuate harassment. You can get away with harassment if you can secure a non-disclosure agreement by paying a bribe. Nothing could be more anti-social. Nothing represents a more toxic workplace culture or better ensures its continuation. Whistleblowers are silenced. If a disclosure is relevant, it should be disclosed—that is, a disclosure about harassment that has been committed, is being committed or is likely to be committed. They are all highly relevant exposures, which would thereby avoid harassment.

This is about ethical standards and workplace misconduct—indeed, gross misconduct. It is not about protecting confidential business information. I say that because that is important. We understand those non-disclosure agreements. This is about sexual harassment. On one hand, transparency and freedom of expression are virtues. On the other, confidentiality, privacy and the protection of personal data are virtues. There can be tensions between legitimate considerations that may tug in different directions. Balances have to be struck but—and it is a big “but”—that may not work well when one party is more powerful than the other. In the case of, for example, Harvey Weinstein, there may also be an important public interest in a disclosure. Non-disclosure agreements need to be properly regulated and not permitted to continue in the way they have and to have their chilling effects. This is especially so when the disclosure ban arises in the context of an employee and employer and/or relates to harassment, bullying or discrimination, including, importantly, sexual harassment, and intellectual property rights and competition considerations are not engaged. It is time to act to prevent the misuse and abuse of NDAs, which should not continue. It has continued for too long. I very much hope that the Minister will meet a group of us to see how we can consolidate a small amendment to the Bill that would strengthen it greatly.

Employment Rights Bill

Baroness Goudie Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 27th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Goudie (Lab)]

My Lords, I congratulate my colleagues on their maiden speeches: my noble friends Lady Berger and Lady Gray, the noble Baroness, Lady Cash, and the noble Lord, Lord Young. It was a pleasure to hear them, and I look forward to working with them on this Bill and other issues. I also thank all those outside bodies who were kind enough to send me briefings for today’s debate and for the continuation of the Bill.

I am pleased to support the Employment Rights Bill, a long-overdue step toward modernising our labour laws, ensuring fairness in the workplace and building an economy that works for everyone—businesses, workers and communities alike. For too long, our employment laws have failed to keep pace with the realities of modern work. Between 2010 and 2024, we saw relatively little new employment legislation, despite profound economic and workforce changes. The key framework governing employment rights, the Employment Rights Act 1996, dates back nearly 30 years. While the world clock has evolved, our laws have not. This Bill is about ensuring that the UK labour market is fit for the future: a labour market that delivers security, flexibility and, of course, dignity in work.

A central pillar to the Bill is ensuring that workers can balance employment with their family responsibilities. Today, too many parents—particularly mothers—are forced to choose between their jobs and their children. A survey by the law firm Slater and Gordon found that six in 10 mothers felt sidelined from the moment they revealed they were pregnant. Additionally, a third of managers surveyed preferred—listen to this—hiring men in their 20s or 30s over women of the same age, fearing potential maternity leave. This is a disgrace. The Bill will strengthen protections for pregnant women and new mothers, ensuring the future of this country can be fairly looked after.

Additionally, making paternity leave and parental leave available from day one of employment will have a significant impact. A study examining Sweden’s 2012 parental leave reform, which allowed fathers up to 30 days of flexible leave during the child’s first year, found significant benefits for maternal health. Specifically, there was a reduction in anti-anxiety prescriptions, a decrease in hospitalisations or specialist visits, and a drop in antibiotic prescriptions among new mothers in the first six months. These improvements are attributed to the father’s increased presence, providing support and allowing mothers to rest and seek preventive care.

Bereavement leave is another crucial reform. Losing a loved one is one of the most difficult experiences anyone can endure, yet too many workers are forced to return to work before they are ready because they do not qualify for leave. This Bill ensures that bereavement leave is a universal right from day one, offering workers the time and dignity to grieve.

This Bill will also strengthen protection against workplace harassment and discrimination—issues that disproportionately affect women. A survey by the Trades Union Congress found that 52% of women had experienced sexual harassment at work—a number that rises to 63% for women aged 18 and 24. The Bill introduces new duties on employers to prevent harassment rather than simply reacting when it happens, creating a culture of accountability and safety. We need a complete ban on non-disclosure agreements in cases of sexual harassment, bullying and general discrimination against people at work. It is really important that victims are no longer silenced; we really must be fervent about this issue.

In addition, the introduction of gender and menopause action plans is a necessary step forward—right now, one in 10 women in the UK have had to stop working.

I am sorry I cannot go on longer.