Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 12 March (HL Deb col 1904), what were the specific grounds for approval of the legal expenses of the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology.

Answered by Baroness Neville-Rolfe - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)

In line with the established practice under multiple administrations of all political colours, Ministers are provided with legal support and representation where matters relate to their conduct and responsibilities as a Minister.

As set out in Chapter 6 of the Cabinet Manual, Ministers are indemnified by the Crown for any actions taken against them for things done or decisions made in the course of their ministerial duties. The indemnity covers the cost of defending any proceedings, as well as costs or damages awarded against the minister. Decisions about whether to provide legal support are made by the relevant department’s Accounting Officer, as happened in this case.

This reflects an important principle that Ministers should be able to carry out their official duties, supported by official advice, in a way which they see fit, without the risk of personal liability constraining their ability to take those official actions. Of course, Ministers remain accountable to Parliament and the wider public for their actions as a Minister.

It would have a chilling effect on public life if Ministers faced the prospect of personal financial harm from those seeking to pressure the Government through vexatious or hostile litigation (or the threat thereof).

More broadly, the principle of legal support from the public purse for official duties is not confined to government. I would observe that there is insurance available to members of the House of Commons, provided by that House at taxpayers’ expense, designed to protect those members when carrying out parliamentary and constituency duties. This includes professional indemnity insurance that covers defamation. I also note that the House of Lords Commission recently agreed in principle to provide professional indemnity insurance to members of this House.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask His Majesty's Government when they plan to launch a call for evidence on the risks of artificial intelligence to trust in information, as proposed in their consultation outcome published 6 February.

Answered by Viscount Camrose

The Government recognises the need to both unlock the opportunities and address the potential risks of artificial intelligence.

As outlined in the AI white paper consultation response, government will shortly publish a Call for Evidence on the impact of AI on trust in information, to develop our understanding of this fast moving and nascent area of technological development, including possible mitigations.

This work is part of our programme to seek a range of expert views – including from researchers, academics, and civil society organisations with relevant expertise.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the new arrangements and communications relating to the roll out of Digital Voice by BT; in particular, what assessment they have made of the clarity of communications to customers regarding opting in or out of the ability to retain their copper connection or move to fibre and how they should do this; whether any opt in or opt out is indefinite or for a limited period; and what are the costs to an individual customer of opting in or opting out.

Answered by Viscount Camrose

The PSTN switch-off is a necessity, given that the network is past its serviceable life and is experiencing increasing failure rates year-on-year. Ultimately everyone will need to move off a copper connection for safety.

Currently, with the exception of a small number of customers who do not use or need a landline, BT has paused all non-voluntary migrations to Digital Voice. As agreed in the PSTN Charter for Communication Providers in December 2023, non-voluntary migrations will only be restarted once BT can guarantee that all possible steps have been taken to protect vulnerable users. Initially, only customers who are identified as not being vulnerable as a result of the PSTN switch-off, will be migrated. However, the migration of vulnerable customers will still happen at a later point with the appropriate support from BT.

The Department is currently working with BT, among other key stakeholders, to define any groups at a heightened risk during the migration, as per the PSTN charter. If a customer notifies BT of any additional needs, they will also be able to defer their migration.

Customers with vulnerabilities or additional needs who are choosing to move to Digital Voice will be provided with free support from BT, such as an engineer in-home installation, a battery backup unit and/or a hybrid landline-mobile handset.

Customers signing new contracts will be provided with a digital landline by default unless they are identified as a telecare user, in which case their migration will be deferred. Openreach engineers will not currently proceed with a migration during an in-home visit if a telecare device is found at a premises.

Customers should not expect to see any additional fees from migrating to VoIP or continuing to use their PSTN landlines.

Found: Clement-Jones; Lord Cromwell; Baroness O’Grady of Upper Holloway; Viscount Thurso.

Found: Agnew of Oulton; Lord Altrincham; Baroness Armstrong of Hill Top; Lord Best; Viscount Chandos; Lord

Found: Q5 Lord Clement-Jones: I have three rather broad questions.

Found: LORD CLEMENT-JONES _ Clause 14, page 27, line 12, after “subject” insert “including meaningful

Found: LORD CLEMENT-JONES _ After Clause 152, insert the following new Clause— “Offence: providing

Found: LORD CLEMENT-JONES _ Clause 14, page 27, line 12, after “subject” insert “including meaningful

Found: LORD CLEMENT-JONES _ Clause 14, page 27, line 12, after “subject” insert “including meaningful

Found: CLEMENT-JONES _ Clause 14, page 27, line 6, after “solely” insert “or predominantly” Member's

Found: B1★_ Lord Clement-Jones to move, as an amendment to Motion B, leave out from “House” to end and

Found: Cookies Lord Clement -Jones and Lord Bassam asked Lord Harlech to write with more detail on our engagement

Found: distribution of data protection cases between courts and tribunals , in response to the question from Lord

Found: Cookies Lord Clement -Jones and Lord Bassam asked Lord Harlech to write with more detail on our engagement

Found: distribution of data protection cases between courts and tribunals , in response to the question from Lord