Death of Ann Widdecombe

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Tuesday 14th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I do not know what Ann Widdecombe would have wanted in relation to that, and I am not going to opine on it. I want to have a free and open debate on those matters, free from intimidation outside this House, and for people to be able to hold their views, whatever they might be, explain them, outline them, defend them and hopefully do so—as all parties in this House do—from the perspective of trying to make this great country a better place to live in for all our citizens. I am not going to give a view on what Ann would or would not have wanted. We should remember her life, not the circumstances of her death, and ensure that, whatever we do, we find whoever perpetrated this act and learn any lessons to be learned. Ultimately, we must accept that a murder has taken place and that somebody needs to be held to account for it. Today, as the whole House has done, we celebrate the life that has been ended by that act.

[The Lord Speaker (Lord Forsyth of Drumlean)]

My Lords, perhaps I could be permitted a few words of my own. Ann Widdecombe was a friend of mine for more than 50 years, believe it or not. She had that quality that guarantees all other virtues: immense courage. She also had great empathy for people, even those she disagreed with. In the absence of anyone on the Bishops’ Bench, perhaps I could be permitted to say that she had a deep and abiding faith, and she believed that she would be with her maker now. If anyone deserves to be with their maker, it is Ann, because of her dedication and deep-held beliefs. We may not have believed in everything she said, but all of us who are sending our condolences to her family should take pride in and have gratitude for her record of public service, which honoured us all and which adorned our Parliament and our democracy.

Southport Inquiry: Prevent Programme

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The second phase of Sir Adrian Fulford’s investigation into the events at Southport includes examining the very issue the noble Baroness has mentioned: the wider, non-ideologically driven potential activity that leads to terrorist or violent behaviour. That second phase, and the terms of reference that we have given Sir Adrian, cover that point. In the Home Office we are also looking at those issues internally, through a separate working party that we have established to examine them. The noble Baroness will know my views on other forms of issues that she has raised; I will not repeat them now, for the sake of brevity.

[The Lord Speaker (Lord Forsyth of Drumlean)]

My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, is taking part remotely. I invite her to speak.

[Baroness Brinton (LD) [V]]

My Lords, our thoughts are with the victims and their families, especially this week with the publication of the inquiry report, which will have brought back many sad memories. The inquiry report is very clear that, unlike with the safeguarding of children, there is a glaring hole in the joint sharing of information to ensure that all agencies are aware of the risks that a child poses to others in society. Yesterday my noble friend Lady Doocey pointed out that under the Crime and Policing Bill the police will need to consult only the youth offending team. Surely, as the report suggests, there must be one lead agency managing this information, but all the agencies involved—schools, social care, medical services—must have a duty to record and share information. Will the Government look at this as an absolute, urgent priority?

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 12th September 2025 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean]

As an amendment to the motion that the bill be now read a second time, at end to insert “but that this House calls upon His Majesty’s Government, in the light of the 32nd Report from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, to ensure sufficient time is available for consideration of amending stages of this bill, and to provide full support at ministerial and official level to the peer in charge of the bill for its remaining stages in the House of Lords.”

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, this amendment would simply implement the advice given by the Cabinet Secretary to the Prime Minister as to how to handle this Bill, which was to treat it in the same way as other Private Members’ Bills bringing in changes to legislation on matters of conscience, such as the abortion Bill, the end of capital punishment or the decriminalisation of homosexuality. The advantage of that, of course, is that it means that government time is made available and all the resources of the Government and the Civil Service are made available for the purpose. I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, for his assurances that he has been given some help.

I am not so sure, however, about the noble and learned Lord’s assurances on the time needed for this. As I understand it, four days have been allocated between now and Christmas to consider the Bill—the Employment Rights Bill has a total of 15 days. These are Fridays, and there are other Private Members’ Bills. It is really important that this matter be discussed properly, and that is why I have tabled this amendment. Anyone who has read the report from the committees of this House will realise that there is much to do on amending the Bill.

My father died in agony. When I went to see him, I said, “I’m so sorry that your cancer is causing you this distress”. He said to me, “Michael, you are to blame”. I was completely poleaxed by that. I asked, “How can you say that I am to blame?” He said, “Because you have consistently voted to prevent me getting what I want, which is the opportunity to decide how and when I come to die”. As a Christian, I have thought about that long and hard, and I have come to the conclusion that my father was right and I was wrong. Therefore, I support absolutely the principle of this Bill.

However, I have some problems with it. On page 7 of the excellent Explanatory Notes to the Bill, a table on what is required is set out. I suspect that people will get to the stage where they just cannot go on any longer. They will do their best to hang on, but they will get to the stage where it is just too much, as my father did. However, under the provisions of this Bill, you have to see a GP, then you have to see another GP and then a panel. There then must be a holding period of no less than three weeks before you can get to the position where you are given what you want. That is completely impractical and impossible. I know that some people will say, “We’re doing that in order to provide protection”, but whom are we protecting? Surely the patient should come before anything else.

I am conscious of time, but one thing more that worries me is the provision in the Bill leaving the Secretary of State for Health, who is against the Bill, up to four years to delay its implementation. The noble and learned Lord, the sponsor of the Bill, said that it is giving hope to people. Well, there is not much hope with the possibility of the Bill not coming into effect until well into the next Parliament. We need time. We need every resource available in government and we need government time, so that we can get this absolutely right. There will not be a second opportunity for a very long time. Anyone who has read the letters that have come into us will know that many people are holding great hopes for this Bill. It is up to this House to amend it so that the other place can make it worthy of their hope.

Overseas Companies: UK-registered Subsidiaries

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Monday 17th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Leong (Lab)]

As I said in my earlier answer, if there is a free trade agreement with a particular country and it is a member of the WTO, we cannot prevent any other companies that are domiciled overseas with a registered company bidding for public contracts. Likewise, we would not want British companies to be debarred from bidding for international contracts, which amount to around £1.3 trillion.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, why is Fujitsu still being allowed to bid for government contracts when it has made no substantial contribution towards the costs and hardship that it caused as a result of the Horizon scandal?

[Lord Leong (Lab)]

The noble Lord is trying to tempt me to answer a question that is beyond the scope of this Question. The contract that was awarded to Fujitsu is not a new contract but a continuation of a contract. I do not have the details before me, but I am happy to write to the noble Lord.

EU Borders: Hand and Face Scanning

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Wednesday 17th April 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

My Lords—

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, I think it is this side.

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

I do not think so. The Minister will note that there is an air of scepticism in the House about the implementation of these new procedures. Will transitional measures be in place to enable the new system to bed in while the existing system carries on working?

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

No, I do not believe that there will. As I say, this system is being operated and introduced by the European Union, so we have limited say in whether there should be transitional arrangements. Having said that, I do not think that the start date has been made public yet. I know there is a target start date, but I would imagine that there is no obligation to start on the date that has already been published if things are not yet ready.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, I apologise to the noble Lord; I did think this was Back-Bench and not Front-Bench Questions.

[Noble Lords]

Oh!

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

Well, it is Back-Bench Questions. Could I say to my noble friend how much I sympathise with him? Not only has he had to deal with the Rwanda legislation but he is now being held to account by Opposition Members for foolish decisions taken by the European Union.

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

I thank my noble friend.

Asylum Seekers: Rwanda

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Thursday 21st March 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

My Lords, as I said, this will be offered to individuals with no right to remain. They are visa overstayers and failed asylum seekers, who are offered this option as part of our regular dialogue. It is very hard to say exactly how many people are likely to be offered this, so I cannot answer that question in its entirety. However, this builds on our already widely used voluntary returns scheme, which saw more than 19,000 people accept support to return to their country of origin last year. We have agreed with the Government of Rwanda that individuals who are relocated voluntarily will have the same package of support for up to five years as those who are being discussed under the Bill.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, has my noble friend the Minister seen reports this morning in the Times, the Telegraph and other newspapers suggesting that this House has delayed the passage of the Rwanda Bill unnecessarily, resulting in people being exposed to the dangers of the channel? Will he take this opportunity to point out that this House was well prepared to pass the legislation back to the House of Commons for consideration before Easter, that it is no fault of this House that the legislation has been delayed and that this House has just been doing its job by asking the Commons to think again and is not responsible for delaying the legislation?

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

I am happy to reassure my noble friend that I have seen those reports and that I passed that very message back before those newspapers published their reports.

Asylum Seekers: Deportation from France

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Monday 4th December 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

I rather agree with Michel Barnier, with whom I imagine the noble Lord sympathises quite a lot, who said:

“You can find nothing in the French constitution about migration, and there is almost nothing in the European treaties. For 30 or 40 years, there’s a kind of interpretation that is always in favour of the migrants … We have to rewrite something in the … treaties or in”


the European Convention on Human Rights. Is he wrong?

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, has my noble friend seen the reports in the newspapers that civil servants in the Home Office are deciding that they cannot comply with Ministers’ policy declarations because they are in breach of the Civil Service Code? Is this not a rather alarming development, if true, and can my noble friend tell us exactly what is going on in the Home Office?

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

I have seen those reports, and I certainly have seen nothing of the sort from any civil servants.

Electronic Travel Authorisation

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Monday 17th July 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)]

I thank the noble Lord for that question. It is quite a long way from comparing ETIAS and ETAs, of course, but the short answer is that the figures that appeared in the Daily Mail article relate to the military aid to civilian authority application, which was made in order to make up for shortfalls in Border Force staff during strike action. I am glad to confirm for the House that there is no strike action planned during the peak of the summer season. I can also confirm that the Border Force strikes at Christmastime saw the effective deployment of soldiers; I am sure that Members of this House are grateful to them for their excellent work on that occasion.

I can assure the noble Lord that we have trained and are ready to deal with situations relating to a shortage of Border Force staff. We have recruited more staff, cancelled some leave and trained staff to address more front-line roles, so the noble Lord should be satisfied with that.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, I voted for Brexit because I thought that it would result in making our country more competitive and reduce the burdens on people. Is this not a classic example of going in the opposite direction, and should we not abandon it?

[Lord Murray of Blidworth (Con)]

I agree entirely with my noble friend as to the sentiment behind the decision that we as a nation took. I can reassure him that the ETA system is as unbureaucratic as it can be and is not linked in the same way that ETIAS is to a burdensome requirement for biometric and fingerprint recognition on entry into and exit from the European Union. The British scheme simply requires the taking of a photograph when someone applies for an ETA on their phone. It will be much smoother and much less burdensome and as a result, economic benefits will, I think, accrue to our country.

National Crime Agency Investigation: Javad Marandi

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

Wednesday 17th May 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

My Lords, the Government responded to the report published by the noble Lord’s committee, Regulating Election Finance, in September 2021, and the Elections Act 2022, to which I have already referred, contains measures which closely link to recommendations made in the report; for example, the new requirement on political parties to declare their assets and liabilities over £500 on registration, and a restriction of third-party campaigning to UK-based or otherwise eligible campaigners. The Government have stated that the recommendations in the report deserve full consideration, electoral law is complex, and more work is required to consider the implications and practicalities.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

Just to follow on from that question from the noble Lord, Lord Evans, does my noble friend accept that all organisations, however properly conducted, can find themselves in difficulty over the money laundering regulations—as, for example, happened with HSBC, of which the noble Lord, Lord Evans, was a director?

[Lord Sharpe of Epsom (Con)]

Yes; I absolutely accept my noble friend’s point. Certainly, in relation to the question that has been asked, it is incumbent on all parties to be vigilant about all donations at all times.

Illegal Migration Bill

Lord Forsyth of Drumlean Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 10th May 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

My Lords, I will concentrate my remarks on the amendment in the name of the noble Lord, Lord Paddick, which is a complete abuse of this House. This House is here to revise and offer advice to the elected House of Commons. For any Member of this House to bring forward an amendment that seeks to kill a Bill completely, which has been passed by majorities of around 60 in the other place and which is an absolute priority for the Prime Minister to stop the boats, is an absolute abuse. I do not think that any Member of this House who respects its values and its role could possibly go through the Lobbies and vote for that amendment.

Of course, the point of the Bill is to stop the boats. I have listened carefully to the speeches that have been made and I have yet to hear a remedy from anyone who opposes this Bill as to how we are going to stop the boats. I hear a lot about the rights of children and the right of people fleeing persecution, much of which I support. However, I cannot support the idea of people drowning in the English Channel who are fleeing from a safe country, which is France. To be drowned in the English Channel and watch your children being taken by the sea must be a most horrendous experience, yet all the people who oppose the Bill have nothing to offer by way of a remedy for that problem, which is happening now and which will happen during the course of the following weeks as the summer—

[The Archbishop of Canterbury]

If the noble Lord were to look at Hansard for 11 December, he would find a whole-day debate on immigration which puts forward some very clear ideas about stopping the boats.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

I am most grateful to the most reverend Primate and I echo the words of my noble friend about what a fantastic job he did on Saturday. I am in strong agreement where he is concerned with issues spiritual rather than temporal. I use the word temporal in this sense because there are of course many things that we can do, but these are all going to take time. People are drowning in the English Channel now. People are leaving a safe country in order to come here, and it is fatuous to try to present this in the way that many have done. The much-misquoted saying, often attributed to Edmund Burke but in fact from John Stuart Mill, is:

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing”.


That is what we are hearing today, effectively that we should do nothing about the immediate problem.

To return to the amendment, the role of this House is to give advice and make amendments. I accept there are issues with the Bill that need further scrutiny, particularly the issues of those who are already here in the United Kingdom and who are victims of slavery and placed in a position where they are unlikely to help the police, or those who are concerned, to deal with the real villains. These are the traffickers and the men and women who exploit people who are under enormous stress and strain. It is just not reasonable to criticise the Government for trying to deal with this problem. How on earth can it be justified that 40,000 Albanians are able to come to this country by crossing from France—a safe country—and to argue that this should not be tackled?

Those who criticise this country’s values need to ask themselves why so many people want to come here rather than remain in France, on the other side of the channel. It has been suggested that perhaps hubris has set in, as a result of the success of the liberals—I call them liberals because they are not liberal democrats. Democrats do not seek to use an unelected House to overturn the decisions made by an elected House. We know perfectly well that the United Kingdom has finite capacity. Our public services are under immense strain and yet there is a notion that we should be spending billions of pounds and not actually addressing the problem of stopping the boats. I say to those who oppose the Bill, by all means improve it, but I am delighted that the Official Opposition have indicated that they will not support the amendment, and the most reverend Primate said the same. We need to recognise that something needs to be done, and done now. This is something, which is an alternative to doing nothing, which is the mission of the people opposite.

[Lord Griffiths of Burry Port (Lab)]

My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down, may I ask in a more timely manner what I was going to ask earlier? The most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury asked whether the noble Lord was aware of the practical proposals made in a previous debate. The noble Lord did not answer that question, and I think the House would like to know.

[Lord Forsyth of Drumlean (Con)]

I am most grateful to the noble Lord, for whom I have immense respect. Of course I am aware of the measures, but I thought I pointed out that those would take time. It is possible to argue for changes in our approach and that it is necessary to use overseas aid to support people in their own countries. I get all that, but there is an immediate problem now, and this Bill deals with it. It is a duty upon this House to get this Bill on the statute book so that we can deal with the terrible things happening in the English Channel.