Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the recent cyber-attack on the Legal Aid Agency; what steps they are taking to ensure that legal aid providers are being remunerated for their work despite any disruption; and when the Agency's online digital service will again be operational.
Answered by Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede - Lord in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)
On Wednesday 23 April, the Department became aware of a cyber-attack on the Legal Aid Agency’s (LAA) online digital services.
To ensure the best chance of reaching as many potentially impacted individuals as possible the Ministry of Justice acted quickly. A notice was published a notice at 08:15 on the 19 May on GOV.UK.
This has been an unprecedented event and every effort is being made to restore services following the criminal attack on our systems. The LAA digital services have been taken offline to negate the threat and prevent further exposure of legal aid providers and users. We have been able to return some systems to internal use, enabling an improved ability to support criminal legal aid applications and payments.
We cannot confirm a specific timescale for full service restoration. In the interim, the LAA will continue to provide updates as soon as they are available and will work closely with representative bodies to ensure any extended or refined contingency measures support providers and their clients to the maximum extent. All updates, including contingency arrangements, are published on the LAA’s dedicated cyber security incident webpage: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/legal-aid-agency-cyber-security-incident.
Our priority remains to maintain access to justice and to ensure legal aid providers can continue to be paid in a timely manner. These enhanced measures are designed to support legal aid providers and their clients and to prevent a significant case backlog while contingency measures are in place.
The data breach is the result of serious criminal activity, but it was enabled by the fragility of the LAA’s IT systems as a result of the long years of underinvestment under the last Conservative Government. By contrast, since taking power this Government has prioritised work to reverse the damage of over a decade of under-investment. That includes the allocation of over £20 million in extra funding this year to stabilise and transform the LAA digital services. This investment will make the system more robust and resilient in the face of similar cyber-attacks in future.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to increase the legal penalties for perpetrators of cyber-attacks, including, in the most serious cases, (1) introducing a minimum term of life imprisonment, and (2) designating perpetrators as terrorists.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government recognises the serious threat posed by cyber-attacks, which can have devastating consequences to UK people and businesses. The Home Office is committed to ensuring the Computer Misuse Act (CMA) remains up to date and effective to tackle cyber criminality.
The CMA is the main legislation that criminalises unauthorised access to computer systems and data. The Act already provides for a range of penalties, including life imprisonment for offences that cause or create a significant risk of serious damage to human welfare or national security (section 3ZA(7)).
The Home Office is considering the issue of sentencing for CMA offences as part of the ongoing review of the Act. An update will be provided once proposals are finalised.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what consideration the security, operations and administrative directorates of the House of Lords gave to erecting a security search centre just inside the new steel fencing outside the House of Lords.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
The House Administration is giving consideration to the relocation of current visitor search and screening locations. Moving current search and screening points for visitors to new locations specifically designed for this purpose would deliver visitor experience improvements, as well as security, accessibility, and operational benefits. However, this consideration is at a very early stage and does not yet have a confirmed business case, timescale, or design. In the first instance, proposals will be brought to the Services Committee, as well as subject to wider engagement with Members.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker, in developing plans for the repair of the Victoria Tower, what consideration was given to (1) constructing a secure pedestrian walkway or passage protected from falling masonry or repair work near, or in line with, the current pedestrian walkway; and (2) keeping the footpath next to Abingdon Green clear of demonstrators to allow the free passage of parliamentarians from 1 Millbank.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
In developing plans for the Victoria Tower Safety Project, several options were considered, including consideration for expanding the existing catchment area to maintain a pedestrian walkway. However, these alternatives did not fully mitigate the risk of falling masonry and were not deemed to represent value for money due to ongoing maintenence and the requirement for land licenses beyond the Parliamentary Estate. Full scaffolding and undertaking stone repairs was therefore identified as the most effective solution to fully mitigate future risks of stone fall.
Management of protest or demonstration outside Parliament is a matter for the Metropoliton Police Service. There is a balance to be struck between the right to protest and Parliamentarians' right to access the seat of democracy unimpeded. The Parliamentary Security Department continues to work closely with partners within the Metropolitan Police Service to ensure access is maintained.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker when the House of Lords Commission was given copies of the planned design for the steel fencing outside the House of Lords, the heritage impact assessment required by UNESCO and the report given to Westminster City Council by English Heritage; and when the temporary permission for the fencing was changed from five years to 10.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
A paper presenting an options appraisal for approaches to an interim fence between Abingdon Street and Old Palace Yard was presented to the House of Lords Commission in November 2023. Four options for the fence included, including images of each in use at other locations and a summary of their potential heritage or planning risks, costs, and security benefits.
A paper containing further information about the design, appearance, and functionality of the fence was presented to the House of Lords Commission in May 2024. Four 3D rendered images, and an ariel plan of the layout, were included at this time.
A Heritage Impact Assessment was prepared by Strategic Estates' Heritage Consultant as part of the planning application. This was not shared with the Commission in full but did form part of the submission to Westminster City Council. Historic England's consultee response to the planning application was not shared with the Commission.
Seeking either a five or ten-year planning consent was considered, with input from Westminster City Council. The formal planning application was made for a period of ten years.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether he will publish the heritage impact assessment for the security fence outside the House of Lords required by UNESCO; when this was sent to Westminster City Council; and whether he will publish the council's response.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
A detailed Heritage Impact Assessment was presented as part of the planning application for the fence between Abingdon Street and Old Palace Yard. The assessment was submitted to Westminster City Council as part of the planning application submission, made in June 2024.
The Heritage Impact Assessment took account of 'Guidance and Toolkit for Impact Assessments in a World Heritage Context' (2022) by UNESCO, ICCROM, ICOMOS and IUCN.
Westminster City Council did not respond directly to the Assessment in their determination of the planning application.
A redacted version of the Heritage Impact Assessment is available to Members, on request.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether he will publish the planning application and design features submitted to Westminster City Council for the addition of the steel fencing on top of the walls at Cromwell Green and the steel fencing on top of the Corus barriers outside the House of Lords.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
I am informed that planning applications relating to security matters for the Palace of Westminster are typically not published in order to protect the security of the building and its users. While some planning applications are published with redactions, this is not possible in relation to security assets, given the sensitive nature of the details of the plans.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker at what stage in the planning or application process were members of the House of Lords Commission given photographs or artists impressions of the steel fencing outside the West Front of the House of Lords.
Answered by Lord Gardiner of Kimble
A paper containing details about the design, apperance and functionality of the fence was presented to the House of Lords Commission in May 2024. Four 3D rendered images, and an ariel plan of the layout were included at this time. This was prior to the submission of the planning application in June 2024 and the date of the issued decision in October 2024.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 21 July (HL9261), what plans they have to impose a ban on all tree and shrubbery clearance work by Network Rail from March to August inclusive to avoid disturbing songbirds during nesting season.
Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)
The government has no plans to impose a ban on tree and shrubbery clearance work by Network Rail. As stated in the previous answer (HL9261), Network Rail has processes in place for managing tree removal around nesting season. Network Rail has committed to increase biodiversity across the rail estate by 2035 but ultimately must prioritise the safe and efficient operation of the railway. Vegetation with suspected or identified nesting birds would only be removed if safety concerns were significant and following consultation with ecologists, lawyers and the British Transport Police.
Asked by: Lord Blencathra (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 11 February (HL4485), what assessment have they made, if any, of the number of potholes in the car park of Penrith Station; and what steps they are taking, if any, to ensure that Network Rail will repair any potholes.
Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)
No assessment has been made by officials about the number of potholes in the car park at Penrith. We understand from Avanti West Coast and Network Rail that a temporary repair of potholes has been put in place at the station front, and a re-surfacing of the road at the station is expected within the coming year. Avanti West Coast will raise with Network Rail the importance of the car park in any plans for pothole repairs.