King’s Speech

Lord Harris of Haringey Excerpts

Thursday 21st May 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab)]

My Lords, the gracious Speech was notable for many things, not just the welcome list of Bills. I rather suspect that your Lordships’ House is going to be even busier in the next Session than it was in the last. There are many Bills that we can look forward to debating and considering in detail over the Session ahead. I also welcome it because—and here I disagree, but only slightly, with the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Stirrup—there was a narrative thread running through it, albeit a slightly thin narrative thread, about building better resilience for the country. Before I go any further, I refer to my registered interest as chair of the National Preparedness Commission.

For example, there are to be Bills to strengthen the resilience of critical infrastructure and to safeguard sovereign supplies, with Bills on energy independence, the steel industry, clean water and highways. Others will reinforce national security, looking at cyber and state threats. The Armed Forces Bill will take steps to expand the pool of reservists. All that is welcome, but the two decades of external shocks that have left our nation in a weakened state merit rather more. We cannot continue to apply, as is suggested, sticking plasters. What is needed is a bold strategy to deliver a stronger, more resilient society for everyone.

Alas, there is one striking omission in the gracious Speech—there is no defence readiness Bill. This was recommended last summer in the strategic defence review led by my noble friend Lord Robertson of Port Ellen. That recommendation was accepted by His Majesty’s Government, but apparently it is not ready. I know that work is progressing on this, and draft legislation to provide the powers needed to prioritise the supplies and support required in the event of a national defence emergency inevitably calls for substantial consultation across government. I understand that, but in an ideal world we would have had it before us this Session, particularly as the international situation has become even more threatening in the short period since the SDR reported.

Indeed, such legislation is a necessary part of the UK’s commitment to Article 3. NATO expects each member country to maintain its own resilience as part of collective defence, and that involves preparedness against all types of shock, including natural disasters, cyber attacks and military threats. That is needed because it is there to ensure the continuity of government and critical services at times of crisis.

I urge my noble friends on the Front Bench to use this unfortunate delay as an opportunity for the Bill to have a broader focus than perhaps is suggested in the strategic defence review. Let us be clear that the nation’s resources may need to be mobilised not just in the event of hostilities but in other civil emergencies, not necessarily arising from nation state action. We will need those mechanisms, and we would need those powers, in another pandemic or to deal with extreme weather events precipitated by climate change and, indeed, many of the other acute risks listed in the National Risk Register.

Something much broader is needed: a national resilience and defence readiness Bill to provide a framework to make the best use of the nation’s resources in the event of any emergency or in response to hostile action. Such a Bill could place a duty on government departments, public bodies, local authorities, large businesses and organisations to build their resilience and bolster their preparedness to respond to different sorts of threats and emergencies. It could set structures to facilitate this and underpin it as part of a concerted national effort to address the dangerous and volatile world that we now face as a nation. This must now be prioritised and brought forward as soon as it is ready—perhaps even before the next gracious Speech. It would be gross negligence for us not to do so.