(3 days, 18 hours ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Barber of Chittlehampton (Lab)
My Lords, as someone relatively new to the House I am very struck by how hard Ministers work in this House, as we have just heard from the noble Lord, Lord True. Having spent 20 or more years working with Governments of different persuasions and seeing Ministers in the Lords, I always think that the Lords Ministers often work harder and get less credit for the work that they do.
I will make three further points in support of this Bill. First, I am honoured to follow both the noble Lord, Lord True, and my noble friend Lady Smith. I congratulate them on the speeches they have made but also on the collaborative approach they have taken to this issue. As a result, I am confident that, should we pass the Bill—I hope we will—it will bring benefits both to this House and to the Government long into the future.
On a previous occasion, the noble Lord, Lord True, set out three principles, which I will repeat because each is important. There should be a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work—and this fits with how hard Ministers in the Lords work. There should be equal treatment of Ministers in both Houses, which is also an important point. Perhaps most importantly, nobody should be prevented by lack of means from taking on the role of a Minister. My noble friend Lady Smith totally supported those three principles and I do too.
Secondly, I emphasise the last of those three points as particularly important. If, regardless of means, we want the younger Members of this House to be able to take on ministerial responsibility, this Bill is essential. Those of us who are—how should I put it?—later in a career are more likely to have a pension or other retirement income than our younger colleagues. I look at the cohort of young noble friends with whom I was privileged to join the Government Benches in January, and see evident competence, commitment, passion and talent. I would not want either the Government or the country to be deprived of the contribution that any one of them might make as Ministers simply because the role was unremunerated. A similar case no doubt has been made in the past, and the noble Lord, Lord True, says he might have made it in relation to all sides of the House in the past and the future.
Thirdly, there is an encouraging precedent. Some noble Lords may be aware that I have a modest sideline in medieval history. In 1406, Henry IV was troubled on many fronts. There was a standoff between his Government and Parliament over both his reform agenda and his tax demands. There was anxiety about religious extremism; at that time, it was not the IRGC but the Lollards. Then, as now, English shipping was under threat in an economically crucial narrow strait, the English Channel rather than Hormuz. Then, as now too, there were expensive wars in two locations that were distracting the Government. Finally, according to the Speaker of the day, Sir John Tiptoft, there were some “rascals” in the King’s Household. To use Barbara Tuchman’s evocative phrase, we sometimes find that we are looking in a “distant mirror”.
As part of his response, Henry IV drew heavily on talent in the Lords. He strengthened his council and decided that all the newly appointed Ministers in his council should be paid. Professor Given-Wilson, one of our most eminent contemporary medieval historians, concluded that this new council was “remarkably successful”. After the introduction of pay for these Ministers, 1408, was, he said,
“financially speaking, the most orderly of the reign”.
The economy was turning a corner.
The principal case set out by both the preceding speakers in favour of this overdue reform is overwhelmingly strong. Meanwhile, with this reform, a glance in that “distant mirror” suggests that, perhaps in spite of everything, we can look forward to positive financial and economic developments in due course. I support the Bill.
(4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Lords Chamber
Lord Barber of Chittlehampton (Lab)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for this Statement and applaud the Prime Minister and the Government for the way that they have responded to the crisis in the Middle East all the way through, both in relation to British people abroad and the entire international situation. I speak as the FCDO envoy on Palestinian governance; I have been there regularly over the last couple of years. I am trying, in a small way, to assist the Palestinian Authority to build an effective Palestinian state, with the rule of law, for the future. This is fundamental work if we want a two-state solution in the future.
I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Purvis, for raising the issue of the West Bank in his remarks. The West Bank is suffering quite significantly from a tightening economic stranglehold, where the tax revenues are collected by the current Israeli Government and not transferred regularly to the Palestinian Authority, so most public sector workers are on a small proportion—25% or 30%—of their salary. In addition, there are a thousand checkpoints across the West Bank and, in some cases, there is aggressive settler violence. That is making the growth of the economy, never mind the governance of the West Bank, ever more difficult. But there are some very powerful, effective, thoughtful and constructive Ministers in the Palestinian Authority, and I am delighted that the British Government are doing their best to help them. Does the Minister agree that this is a time, with all the other distractions in the Middle East, to continue that work to strengthen the Palestinian Authority and, if possible, to make its work even stronger and more effective?
I thank my noble friend for his comments and agree completely with him. When the Foreign Secretary presented her Statement in the other place, I think she said that we must redouble our efforts in focusing on and supporting a two-state solution. I acknowledge the work that my noble friend undertakes to support the Palestinian Authority. We made that support clear, which is why we took the decision to recognise Palestine, because we need to ensure that that is the focus.
The Foreign Secretary responded to a number of things. When I last visited the West Bank, I saw the groups of thugs—I do not call them settlers—who sit on top of the hills above Palestinian villages. They do not just harass people: the most horrendous case that we saw this week was a family returning from the shops, and young children being shot. We have made representations and are asking for clear investigations into this. The rule of law applies to Palestinian people too. They deserve the opportunity to be able to live and work in peace.
(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, as we sit in this House, and we feel safe and secure, our thoughts must be with those across the region, but particularly in Iran, who will be fearing what comes next and what their lives are going to be in the weeks to come. It is not for us to urge anyone to fight back, but I think there will be a natural reaction from people who have been protesting. The right reverend Prelate is right to speak of caution: if we look at how many protesters in Iran have been killed—murdered by the security forces—we realise how dangerous this has become for them. I appreciate that there are lessons to be learned from what happened in the past, and I agree with her on the survival instinct of the regime, but it is the right action to take to try to remove the weaponry they have to wreak havoc on others, including their own people.
Lord Barber of Chittlehampton (Lab)
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for her wisdom and the Statement that she has repeated. Among the many important questions that this conflict raises is the prospect of a two-state solution. In a Statement about the Middle East, it is important to look at all the core elements of this debate. One part of the two-state solution must be the building of an effective Palestinian state that has the rule of law. The Government’s recognition of Palestine was a major step forward, and I congratulate Ministers on that work. I also draw attention to the active support that the Government are giving, and indeed the previous Government gave, to the building of a future Palestinian state through the Palestinian Authority. This is work that I am personally involved in. Can my noble friend reassure me that the importance of building a Palestinian state is not diminished by the conflict going on around this area? Indeed, it may be more important than it has ever been.
My noble friend makes a similar point to that made earlier: conflict in one part of the world should not distract us from seeking to resolve conflict in another part of the world. It is very difficult when you look at the various hotspots around the world at the moment. I pay tribute to the work that my noble friend has done on this over many years. He is absolutely right. Even when it seems difficult, holding out hope for a two-state solution, with a viable Palestine and a safe and secure Israel, is so important. The whole area needs that safety and security. The conflict in Iran obviously has wider implications across the region, but just because we are involved in, and are trying to resolve, one issue, that does not mean that we can ignore the many other issues that bring conflict to the world.