Debates between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett during the 2019 Parliament

Mon 20th Feb 2023
Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill
Lords Chamber

Committee stage: Part 1 & Committee stage & Committee stage
Thu 17th Mar 2022
Elections Bill
Lords Chamber

Lords Hansard - Part 2 & Committee stage: Part 2
Tue 18th May 2021

Homelessness: Vagrancy Act 1824

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Monday 10th July 2023

(8 months, 3 weeks ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I am sure the House realises that I cannot possibly confirm that as I cannot pre-empt anything that might be in the King’s Speech.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Minister has mentioned a number of times that she will bring this forward in suitable legislation. She must have some legislation in mind. What is it?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I never said that I would bring it forward—I said that the Government would. It is now in the hands of the Home Office, which is dealing with this.

Women and Men: Pay Gap

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Wednesday 8th March 2023

(1 year ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

The noble Baroness is absolutely right. That is why we are working with schools and encouraging young people to take up STEM subjects in particular. Since 2010, there has been a 31% increase in girls’ entry into STEM A-levels. That is a great success, but there has also been a 34% increase in women being accepted on to full-time STEM undergraduate courses in the UK. I look forward to this increasing, because we need more women in these areas.

--- Later in debate ---
Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Thank you. There is widespread agreement that an effective parental leave scheme that encourages fathers to shoulder more of the work of caring for young children is one of the keys to gender equality at work. There is also wide agreement that the current parental leave scheme is utterly ineffective. It is now five years since the Government began their review of the scheme. What has happened to it?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

Interestingly enough, we have launched an online tool, hosted by GOV.UK, to make it easier for parents to check if they are eligible for shared parental leave, plan their leave, and give the required notice and information to their employer. The number of couples taking up shared parental leave and pay is increasing year on year; last year it was at 13,000. We are also looking at what more we can do to make it easier for fathers to take paternity leave, to challenge the entrenched assumption that caring is the sole responsibility of the mother.

Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I will read Hansard, then write to her and put a copy in the Library.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, this debate has shown the importance of some of the gaps in the Government’s levelling-up mission. It also shows how social and environmental justice are intertwined in terms of child poverty, the environment and disability, as we have talked about. They gel together well as a set of amendments.

I am very grateful to noble Lords who spoke in support of Amendment 4. Some powerful speeches have enriched the case for adding a child poverty mission to the list of missions. I am very grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Young of Cookham, who looked for a way through without an extra mission but looking at how the current missions could be adapted. It was very disappointing that the Minister rather rejected that olive branch—that way out or way through—and has not even agreed to take it away and consider it as an option.

I thank the Minister for engaging with the issues raised, but, needless to say, I found her response very disappointing. I think she said that the Government accept that child poverty is an issue that we must keep an eye on, manage and act on—but where is the Government’s child poverty strategy? There is none. It is simply not good enough to say that it is all about getting parents into paid work, without even acknowledging the growth of in-work poverty and the number of children in families who have someone in paid work and yet are in real, serious poverty.

The Minister said that she did not want to have targets that would just take people above the poverty line. That is one of the reasons why the amendment talked about deep poverty, not simply getting those just below the line over it. It is a shame that the noble Baroness, Lady Stroud, could not be here, because her Social Metrics Commission has done a lot to draw attention to the increasingly serious issue of the depths of poverty. We now have organisations such as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation talking about destitution. In our modern-day society, this is really not something to be complacent about.

The Minister said, “we are not complacent”, but she then went on to repeat all the wonderful things that the Government are doing, none of which is reducing child poverty—they may be managing it but are not reducing it. It is irrelevant to this amendment to say that we are doing this and that, because those things are not serving to reduce the level of child poverty. I am afraid that, for me, that smacks of complacency.

I do not want to keep people from their dinner. The Minister said that she hoped that we would be reassured by what we had heard and withdraw the amendment. I will of course withdraw, but do not take that as me being in any way reassured. I am not. We will have to consider whether we want to come back on Report with an amendment on child poverty. But, for now, I beg leave to withdraw.

Domestic Abuse Victims: Housing Benefit

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Monday 12th December 2022

(1 year, 3 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I have not seen that report, but I will certainly look at it. Under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, local authorities must commission enough of the right support to meet the needs of all of those victims and their children, and they must monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of that provision. Therefore, if they are not doing that, I will certainly take that back to the department and we will look into it further.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, when freezing the housing allowance yet again, did the Government assess the impact on domestic abuse survivors and their children trying to establish themselves in independent accommodation?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

Yes, the noble Baroness is right that that was a difficult decision in the economic climate as it is, but, as I have said in this Chamber before, we had to make a very balanced decision on rent and social housing rents because of the effect on the provider as well as on the resident.

Renters Reform Bill

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Tuesday 22nd November 2022

(1 year, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

As we discussed in a lot of detail last week, this was an extremely sad and very disturbing case. On whether we will look at the healthy homes standard again, I think we will now wait to see if it is going to be in the renters reform Bill. In the meantime, the Secretary of State wrote to all local authorities this week to insist that they look at their stock, so that we as a department and a Government know exactly what is happening in our social housing stock as far as mould and damp are concerned.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, one reason why low-income tenants are struggling with their rents is that the local housing allowance has been frozen. Can the Minister explain why?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

We have to understand that this country is in an economically difficult time, and very difficult decisions have to be made. If we look at what was given to very vulnerable groups of people in the Statement last week, I think noble Lords will agree that the Government are doing all they possibly can—

Elections Bill

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I do not know about mandatory ID cards. All I know is that they have to use voter identification when they vote and that is the important issue—

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am sorry to interrupt but surely the important thing is that if they already have to have an ID card, it is very different from having to get a special ID card to vote.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I do not agree with that. I do not think that is necessary. It is in the government manifesto and electoral fraud is not a victimless crime. I know the noble Lord, Lord Woolley, was very clear that there had been only one case of fraud but the impact of electoral fraud on voters can be very significant. It takes away their right to vote as they want to—whether through intimidation, bribery, impersonating somebody or casting their vote for them—

--- Later in debate ---
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I think that is a different discussion.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This might be helpful, because we were wondering what was in the manifesto. In fact, the Joint Committee on Human Rights quotes from it:

“We will protect the integrity of our democracy by introducing identification to vote at polling stations, stopping postal vote harvesting and measures to prevent any foreign interference in elections.”


There is nothing about photo ID.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

Can we now move on, please?

Inflation: Families

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Wednesday 16th March 2022

(2 years ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the Government understand people’s concern about pressure on household budgets and are taking action to help. We are working closely and monitoring the situation with the Bank of England. The Government are also putting in place policies to help families and individuals to meet the rising costs of living, such as increasing the national living wage and cutting the taper rate in universal credit. I am sorry to disappoint the right reverend Prelate, but we have no plans to change the two-child policy.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, ONS research shows that many are cutting back on basics in the face of the cost of living crisis, but what about parents struggling on inadequate benefits, the real value of which is set to fall by over 4% over the coming year? Many of them are already cutting back to the bone and cannot wait for next year’s smoothing. What are they supposed to do if the Government refuse to act on the growing calls for an additional increase in benefits?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the Government are spending £6.6 billion this year in increasing benefit rates: £2.6 billion on working-age benefits and £4 billion on pension benefits. I agree that the uprating order was only 3.1%, but we have increased other rates, as I explained to the right reverend Prelate. We will continue to monitor it and, if necessary, will look in further detail.

National Disability Strategy

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Thursday 10th February 2022

(2 years, 1 month ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My noble friend is absolutely right: there is no shortage of issues. I have mentioned some that are being changed and some that are on their way to changing, but there are a lot more that need to change and many more that are not in the strategy and need to be covered. As the Prime Minister said when he launched the strategy, this is just a “down payment”—this is just the beginning—but we are committed. We are making strides, going forward and delivering.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, last week the Work and Pensions Committee took the highly unusual step of publishing a 2020 research report commissioned by the DWP but, in effect, suppressed by it and ignored by last year’s disability Green Paper. What does the Minister think is the policy implication of that report’s finding that disabled people, totally reliant on benefits, are often unable to meet basic needs, such as food, rent and heating?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

I am sorry; I have not read that report. The DWP takes a lot of interest in all these reports and it is important that we look at the issues for disabled people, at all times. But we are spending a record £59 billion on benefits this year to support disabled people and people with long-term health conditions. That is 2.5% of GDP. There is another £421 million in the household support fund, so we are putting money into this and supporting disabled people, wherever and whenever we can.

Queen’s Speech

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Tuesday 18th May 2021

(2 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab) [V]
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the new plan for immigration will, we are told, increase the asylum system’s “fairness and efficacy”. We certainly need more fairness and efficacy, but the Law Society and refugee and human rights groups warn that this plan spells the opposite, with

“dire consequences for children and young people”,

according to the Children’s Society.

I can do no better than to cite the UNHCR’s devastating critique. This

“discriminatory two-tiered approach … will undermine the 1951 Convention and international protection system, not just in the UK, but globally.”

A commitment to resettlement and improved safe and legal pathways, which are urgently needed but for which there is no detail, cannot,

“substitute for or absolve a State of its obligations towards persons seeking asylum at its borders”.

The inferior temporary protection status offered to irregular entrants who stay in the UK is incompatible with international refugee law. We are told that the

“human consequences …will be very serious’.

The UNHCR has offered to work with the Government

“to adopt a more sensible, humane and legally sound”

approach. Could the Minister tell us the Government’s response to this offer, how their plan will work, given the reported refusal of all EU countries to co-operate, and what are the plans to open up safe routes?

More positive is the commitment to correct what is described as

“historical anomalies in British Nationality law which have long prevented individuals from gaining British citizenship or registering for citizenship, through no fault of their own.”

This is a real injustice suffered by the children of British Overseas Territory citizens of a certain age, denied citizenship simply because their parents were not married. It should have been rectified years ago.

With regard to registering for citizenship, there has been a long-standing concern across the House about the barriers faced by children who were born or have grown up in the UK who have to register their entitlement to citizenship because of their parents’ immigration status. In February, the Court of Appeal ruled that the exorbitant fee is unlawful because it was set without consideration of the best interests of the child. Can the Minister assure us that the consequent Section 55 best interests assessment will be published, and say when?

This shameful policy reflects the failure to put children’s best interests at the heart of policy-making. Twice during the Queen’s Speech debate, ministerial responses have ignored calls for a Cabinet-level Minister for children. I trust this will not happen today. Among other things, such a Minister would help to ensure that children are treated as a priority for the levelling-up agenda.

Given the prominence of that agenda, it is incomprehensible, as the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has commented, that there is no sign of the employment Bill, which we were promised would protect and enhance workers’ rights. The Government have responded that the Bill will be introduced when the time is right. But surely, if we are to “build back better” from the pandemic, this parliamentary Session is exactly the right time: the right time to address endemic insecurity, especially among the lower paid; the right time to introduce promised leave, which needs to be paid, for around 5 million informal carers who juggle paid work and care and who have borne such a heavy burden during the pandemic; and the right time to reform shared parental leave, so as to ensure greater paternal involvement, as mothers have paid the price during the pandemic due to increased childcare responsibilities. When will the responses to the long-standing consultations on both carers’ and parental leave finally be published?

The briefing note on the speech includes a welcome acknowledgement that levelling up involves living standards. This means that it must address poverty and in particular child poverty, which is worsening in terms of both numbers and depth. We need investment in what the Biden Administration term the “human infrastructure” of financial support. At a minimum, the Government should now commit to maintaining the £20 UC uplift and its extension to legacy and related benefits, and to improving support for children, given the mounting evidence of how families with children have suffered disproportionately over the past year. The forthcoming levelling up White Paper must address these issues—

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Con)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I remind noble Lords that the advisory time limit for this debate is four minutes.

Covid-19: Department for Work and Pensions Update

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Tuesday 5th May 2020

(3 years, 10 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I too thank DWP staff for their amazing work. I welcome the increase in the UC standard rate but in the face of accumulating evidence of serious hardship, even hunger, among families with children—and the stated intention to help those in greatest need—why have the Government resisted growing civil society calls for an increase in child benefit or other benefits for children? Given that it takes only two months to implement the uprating of legacy benefits from when they were agreed by Parliament, will they reconsider their refusal to increase legacy benefits on technical grounds? At the very least, will they consider a one-off bonus to compensate for not doing so?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook
- Hansard - -

I thank the noble Baroness for her question. This is an unprecedented time. The department has looked at how it can invest more money, that is quick and simple to deliver, into the benefits system. That is what we have done, particularly with our increases in universal credit. That is the best way we can ensure that the money—£1,000 a year—is going to families with children. It has been done quickly and speedily; that has to be the way to do it.

Equal Pay Legislation

Debate between Baroness Scott of Bybrook and Baroness Lister of Burtersett
Tuesday 10th March 2020

(4 years ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook
- Hansard - -

Yes, it is a complex issue, and the Government will be looking into it over the next year.

Baroness Lister of Burtersett Portrait Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, the Minister explained why the right to know may be difficult, but she has not explained why she said that it will not help. Could she explain that now?

Baroness Scott of Bybrook Portrait Baroness Scott of Bybrook
- Hansard - -

The issue about it helping is that certain women will not want to ask that question in case they will be at a disadvantage, because they will fear for their jobs and their relationships with their fellow colleagues. Therefore, we need to know from employees and employers what is the best way to make sure that people get equal pay in this country.