UK-India: Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Wednesday 4th March 2026 Grand Committee

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, as a member of the committee that produced this report, I congratulate our former chairman, who has just spoken, for guiding us through an extremely complex and quite prolonged report on a wide variety of subjects. We think that it is about trade, but the truth is that trade is security, security is confidence, confidence is stability, and stability is investment, expansion and peace. Therefore, this is inevitably just a visible part of a much larger subject area. It is an absolutely excellent report. Of course, I would say that anyway but, having spent 60 years in this Palace—40 of them on committees and the remaining 20 in or out of the Government— I think that this is really one of the best reports that I have ever read. I am not exaggerating that nor just saying it because it is a nice thing to say.

I want to concentrate a little more than the chairman did on, not so much the detail, but the proposition—found in paragraph 223 on page 48—that the whole agreement has to be understood within the wider context of the UK’s evolving relationship with India. This is really the point. We are talking here not just about another country and another FTA, but a relationship with an enormous country, which goes back hundreds of years. It is, in population, the largest of all and is obviously set for great things as it grows increasingly fast and increasingly finds itself at the centre of the world, certainly in its foreign policy as it seeks a balance between the autocracies and the liberal capitalist world, and to do so with some considerable skill—although there are one or two areas of criticism as well.

I think it was Governor Carney, now Mr Carney the Prime Minister of Canada, who was talking the other day about the knowledge and potential power of the middle-power nations. It is not all a game for the big boys, for China, America or even Russia. Mr Trump loves to say, “We’re holding all the cards; you don’t have any cards”, but it is not true. If the middle-ranking powers in influence work together increasingly, as we are trying to work with India, there will be a number of very valuable cards that we can and should play, contrary to dealing with Mr Putin or Xi Jinping. These are things that we should not just give up, saying “They are big; they are going to decide”—they are not. This is not necessarily the age of great powers that the President of the United States thinks it is. For a start, the Commonwealth is 56 nations and 2.6 billion people, of whom more than half are Indians inside the great Indian nation. There are many other areas of technology where they are beginning to take the same kind of lead as we now associate with China.

If I have any regrets about shortcomings, to add to the points made by our chair, I would have liked to see, first, a little more about the role of the Commonwealth in the future pattern of things, which I think will be much greater than people realise or understand, partly because, in the digital age, you cannot overcentralise to the degree that some organisations are trying to do or have tried to do and failed. Secondly, there are specific issues—dare I even mention the controversial Chagos Islands and the whole north Indian Ocean—where the Commonwealth, and India in particular, might have had a much bigger role to play if they had been consulted and things had been discussed with them in the way that we discussed this FTA with them.

Sadly, as the chairman mentioned, when it comes to services, not much is said. This is a huge omission because services come into every goods package as well. We have been through a curious phase, first, with the statisticians of the world not recognising services at all; then bundling them in with goods; then taking them out again; and now we are through to a fourth phase where everything is riddled with, filled with, loaded with services. You cannot even export a bunch of bananas without a large degree of the service element as well. There should therefore be a little more understanding that not only do services come into absolutely everything—all trade of every kind—but they are mixed with goods, inevitably. Of course, there is also the omission of legal services. To some extent, these things are dealt with in the other agreement that HMG made with India in July 2025, which we now call, rather grandly, a comprehensive strategic partnership. That deals with strictly non-trade issues, particularly cultural issues, which are extremely important.

We should have said a little more about climate and the desire to get emissions down. If one is looking at the source of ever-rising emissions, it is not this country, nor many countries, but India certainly is one of them. What India needs, with about 1,000 coal-fired stations, is the low-cost technology for carbon capture and storage. We are rather good at that, and we could have perhaps spent more money and effort on that, if we really want emissions down, rather than spending it on rather more splendid things that sound good but do not contribute at all to the world’s reduction of emissions.

I would like to have seen a lot more on small and medium-sized businesses, which the chairman mentioned. The other day I think I heard a Minister—I hope I will not be pressed for a name or any detail—respond to the question of what proportion of our businesses are SMEs by saying, “About 70%”. That is completely wrong. According to official statistics, 99.18% of businesses in this nation employ fewer than 50 people. Businesses employing 50 to 249 people make up 0.67%, and large businesses 0.15%. In other words, more than ever, modern economies are overwhelmingly comprised of small enterprises, and it is their interests and concerns that should be at the centre of our evolving relationship with India.

Finally, I remind noble Lords that India is the biggest democracy. It is using AI and other technologies to, among other things, speak simultaneously in 30 languages to its vast electorate. The India of the future is a glittering prospect and one that deserves both respect and friendship. Friendship has to be worked at, night and day, and we have to work a lot harder than we have done in the past. The report is a step on the way and I am very honoured to have been involved in its production.

US Tariffs

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Monday 23rd February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Stockwood (Lab)]

The question of certainty, raised by the noble Lords, Lord Lamont and Lord Fox, is critical to business. We live in a world that is changing rapidly and evolving minute by minute—I just checked my BBC feed on my way into the Chamber this afternoon. What I can say is that this Government have a plan: for the first time since the 1960s, we have an industrial strategy that focuses on our competitive advantage in automotive, technology and pharmaceuticals. It remains important to have clarity on our comparative advantage, and we remain in negotiation with all those key sectors; indeed, the pharmaceutical sector has the most preferential deal globally. I was due to have a meeting at 3 pm today with the pharmaceutical sector, and this has overridden that. These are fast-moving events. We remain cool-headed, trying to negotiate on behalf of UK businesses, and we are confident that our preferential relationship with the US will bear dividends as things develop this week.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, I know that history does not always repeat itself, but would it be a kindness at this stage to remind President Donald Trump that the American tariff protections of the 1930s by Smoot and Hawley played a major part in accelerating the onset of the Second World War?

[Lord Stockwood (Lab)]

Yes, I thank the noble Lord for that.

Data Adequacy Status: EU Data Protection Standards

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Thursday 4th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, when it comes to data adequacy, the Government are, of course, aware of a report from the UK Statistics Authority that said:

“Quality problems have manifested into published errors, delays, and de-accreditation of official statistics”.


That is pretty damning stuff. Can the Minister tell us what is going to be done now to improve the situation? Flying blind is surely really rather dangerous in the present world circumstances, particularly for this Government.

[Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his question. I think about the adequacy of the Office for National Statistics and some of the information that it provides, which we all rely on. In terms of the particular programme of enhancement, I shall need to come back to him on that point to set out what is being done in that area.

Steel Industry

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

2nd reading
Saturday 12th April 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, it takes only a few minutes to see why British Steel is in dreadful trouble and chaos, and why we are where we are today. First, its costs are very uncompetitive indeed, especially the cost of electric power, as my noble friend Lord Hunt pointed out in his excellent opening speech. We have some of the highest energy costs for industry in the entire world—so we are told. Secondly, there is this premature and badly planned rush to go green—in all industries, not just steel—with various levies and additional costs at every point, and the cutting out of gas and coke, as we have heard, and all other cheaper alternatives.

We have to ask why electricity costs are so crushingly high that they are having this effect on our economy and the whole of our steel industry, including the giant Scunthorpe plant. It is a big plant by our standards. We are fed stuff about costs being linked to the world gas price. We are big importers of gas nowadays, but this is the sort of marginal-cost economic argument that, frankly, could be swiftly corrected. There has been talk about blame, and that applies obviously to the previous Government as well as this Government.

But again, world gas prices are falling quite fast right now and there is plenty of gas available throughout the world, both through pipelines from Norway and elsewhere and from LNG galore—although Mr Trump may put a stop to that, because most of it comes from shale gas in the United States. So, no, the exceptionally high price does not come from that, really. It comes from the fact that we have drifted as a nation into the most extravagant and costly patterns of electricity generation possible. The planned massive increase in reliance on renewables will therefore mean massive reliance when the wind around the UK does not blow—about 3,000 hours a year: slightly under one-third—mainly on new gas-fired plants, which we are sensibly looking at now, and new nuclear, preferably small, attractive to the private sector and built on time, to ensure that we continue to get a first-world, reliable, affordable power supply at a vastly higher level than hitherto, which we need in a modern industrial state.

In a few years it may be that cheaper hydrogen will help on this front, but, for the moment, there is no possible alternative to new gas-fired stations, which will have to be combined with carbon capture and storage facilities—one is being built and many more are needed—and new nuclear, which I hope will be small and attractive to private investors, in line with new technology and not in the white-elephant class, and a brand new transmission grid as well, at an estimated cost of £600 billion.

So no wonder our small steel-making sector—which, remember, is 0.3% of world production, as against China’s 54%—was going to be in severe trouble, and that, as the noble Lord, Lord Kerr, has just reminded us, will continue. Why? Because, whether Scunthorpe is saved or not, we will continue to import Chinese steel. Most products and services in the world have a Chinese component because most of the world is computerised and most computers have Chinese components of some kind, whether through services or actual production. I hope that the President of the United States understands this but, frankly, I do not think he does. Instead, I fear that he will lead us not to MAGA—Make America Great Again—but to Make America Small Again. That would be a tragedy that we must seek ourselves to help America recover from.

Electronic Media: False Information

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Thursday 12th September 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Lab)]

My Lords, we have engagement with the large platforms at every level, including of course on the aspects of business and trade to which they contribute. I reassure my noble friend that, however big those companies are, they must comply with UK laws. We will ensure, throughout the rollout of the Online Safety Act, that everybody, however big and rich the individual, must comply with the Act.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, is not the reality that there has been a huge shift of global power in favour of the giant electronic platforms? I see that, for instance, the French have gone so far as to arrest the chairman of one of the biggest platforms in the world. Is that the kind of remedy that we will consider here?

[Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Lab)]

I reiterate to the noble Lord that we have very high expectations of companies that have access to the British economy and society. If they do not adhere to the law or act in any way that contributes positively to our society, we will be increasingly assertive in our response, including by making full use of the powers brought in by the Online Safety Act. They are not above the law, and we will monitor their activities carefully.

Lithium-ion Battery Safety Bill [HL]

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 6th September 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Redesdale (LD)]

My Lords, House of Lords Private Members’ Bills are rarely successful in reaching the statute book. I should know—I have introduced quite a few over the years. Their purpose is often to raise the issues in the Bill and encourage the Government to bring forward their own legislation. In that regard, the lithium-ion safety Bill has been incredibly successful: we have only got to Second Reading and already the Government have responded by publishing the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill.

Of course, as the Minister will say, that Bill will cover many of the areas in my Private Member’s Bill. In the light of that, I will therefore look to amend the Bill in Committee. However, while going through the clauses, there are a number of areas where I would like to question the Minister concerning the scope of the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill. I start by welcoming the Minister to her new role and thanking her for arranging a briefing from the Bill team, which was incredibly helpful and constructive.

The basis of this Bill is about protecting the public. Lithium-ion batteries are a vital part of the UK’s transition to a greener, lower-carbon future. Indeed, the acceptance of these batteries as an integral part of our lives ranges from laptops through to the electric bike I have parked outside the building today; it is, of course, an issue that we are not allowed to bring electric bikes into the building because of the potential fire risk.

The way we treat lithium-ion batteries shows how safe people feel about them. Although the vast majority of batteries are safe, there are two areas that need to be focused on: the fires that can be caused by poor-quality batteries and chargers; and the problems associated with disposal. Electrical Safety First, a prime mover in drafting this Bill, has calculated that, on average, an e-bike fire or e-scooter fire occurs once every two days in London—a worrying trend that is happening across the country. Since 2020, lithium-ion battery fires linked to the charging of e-bikes and e-scooters have been linked to 13 deaths in the UK, with many other people seriously injured or hospitalised—including, of course, members of the fire service—and significant damage caused to property.

Lithium-ion battery fires are caused by thermal runaway. The reaction in the cells of the lithium-ion battery produces an exothermic reaction that cascades through all the cells of the battery; this causes a prolonged release of energy and results in fires with temperatures exceeding 600 degrees Celsius. The batteries release toxic gases such as hydrofluoric acid, which corrodes the lungs. Once they have started, lithium-ion battery fires are almost impossible to extinguish with traditional firefighting methods as the battery creates its own oxygen.

Although the risk of fire is low, the ways in which people charge their e-bikes and e-scooters mean that these fires can be particularly dangerous. Many devices are charged in halls or stairwells—and often overnight, which is one of the reasons for the number of deaths associated with fires at home.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

Forgive me for interrupting the noble Lord’s extremely interesting and important speech so early. Can I just ask at the outset whether this legislation proposal addresses the future? We know that a great tide of new technologies is going to replace lithium-ion. I have a list in front of me now: sodium-based batteries, graphene batteries and manganese oxide batteries. Most of them are being pushed by the Chinese. Does the noble Lord’s legislation look forward to this new scene and in any way address the obvious problems that are going to come with this new generation of different technologies for batteries?

[Lord Redesdale (LD)]

The simple answer is no, I am afraid. Obviously, there will be a new generation of sodium batteries with their own problems, but they will, I hope, be extremely safe when brought to market.

There is a growing awareness of the fire risk from faulty batteries or defective chargers. However, less well known is the area of disposal. Many batteries end up in the waste stream without being segregated. Batteries are presenting acute challenges for operators in the metal recycling industry. The British Metals Recycling Association has estimated that each year more than 200 fires at metal recycling plants are caused by lithium-ion batteries, with damaging environmental impacts including harmful emissions being released into the atmosphere and contamination of firefighting waters. The insurance company Zurich has seen claims for lithium-ion fires increase significantly over the past few years, and research from Recycle Your Electricals shows that battery fires in bin lorries and at waste sites in the UK have reached an all-time high of more than 1,200 in 2024—an increase of 71% from 700 in 2022.

A consultation by the Government on battery disposal is planned. That is timely, but we should recognise that the rate of recycling is low; I suggest that the figures on recycling mask that because fewer batteries are actually recycled than are reflected in the figures. When I met it, the British and Irish Portable Battery Association set out some of the problems associated with recycling. One area worth considering is working on solutions to regulations to allow batteries to be collected, perhaps by delivery companies or supermarket delivery drivers. This could be a safe way of recycling the millions of used batteries that are in people’s drawers around the country without people dumping them in the rubbish; I suggest that many noble Lords have a whole box full of unrecycled batteries that they leave in places and always forget to take to the recycling centre.

I was going to give a long speech about disposable vapes, another real issue here. However, due to time, I will leave my noble friend Lord Foster to deal with that and instead move on to the clauses in the Bill. Clause 1 details the purposes of the Bill, including

“to better protect … householders, and … communities from the dangers of lithium-ion batteries”

and

“to increase public confidence in, and acceptance of, Battery Energy Storage Systems”.

Clause 2 would require the fire service, the Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive to be statutory consultees on planning for new stand-alone battery energy storage systems. This would allow for a greater understanding of the risk profile and necessary planning to allow any future incidents to be responded to by the relevant services. This clause may be addressed by Defra and the EA in the consultation they are taking forward and the work they are undertaking, but making sure that the fire and emergency services can access these batteries in the unlikely event of a fire is really important—especially if the batteries do not need planning permission because they are retrofitted into sites close to residential areas.

Clause 3 would require the Secretary of State to make regulations requiring the operator of online marketplaces to take reasonable steps to ensure that the products sold on their platforms conform to the relevant safety standards. Currently, substandard and dangerous products relating to and including high-risk lithium-ion batteries, such as universal chargers or ill-made conversion kits, are continually bought and sold across a plethora of online marketplaces, presenting risks to those purchasing and using such products. The health briefing from the Bill team indicates that this clause will be covered in the new Bill coming forward. However, I hope that the Minister can ensure that there is a focus on conversion and charging kits because this is where most of the fires occur.

Clause 4 would introduce third-party certification of all e-bike and e-scooter batteries before they can be placed on the UK market. This is a similar requirement to that for other high-risk products such as heavy machinery and fireworks. Having a dedicated safety standard to monitor and enforce compliance would also aid trading standards and the Office for Product Safety and Standards in their duties. This morning when I took my bike out, I read the back of the charger. It does have a CE mark, which gave me confidence—until I talked to members of the industry, who said, “That might not give you all the confidence that you really need”. I am fortunate that I charge my bike in a bike shed outside, on that basis.

Clause 5 would introduce safety standards for ancillary products associated with these devices, such as a standard for conversion kits and chargers. This would reduce the risk of improper battery systems powering converted e-bikes and the risk of overcharging the battery, which can lead to thermal runaway.

Clause 6 would introduce regulations for the disposal and safety information supplied with the battery, giving clear information on the disposal requirements and the cell chemistry in the battery. This clause would help to reduce the number of fires at waste disposal sites and in bin lorries and provide information about the chemicals that people may have been exposed to, helping healthcare professionals to administer appropriate treatment.

I look forward to the Minister’s response. In light of the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, I have feeling that this Bill might not sail through the House and on to the Commons. However, I will be looking to perhaps move forward to Committee, where I would address any concerns, especially those raised by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. If the Minister can give me assurances at a later stage, I may even withdraw the Bill.

Much of the meat of the new metrology Bill—I keep thinking of it as “meteorology”—will come in secondary legislation. I hope that the Minister will hold consultations with all parties going forward, especially on this issue. To help me decide whether to withdraw the Bill, I hope I can have a meeting with some of her officials and the relevant parties before the next stage.

I thank all noble Lords who are taking part in this debate. I beg to move.

Online Safety Legislation: Abuse on Social Media

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Thursday 5th September 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD)]

My Lords—

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords—

[Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Lab Co-op)]

My Lords, we will hear from the Lib Dem Benches and then from the Conservative Benches.

Trade (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) Bill [HL]

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd January 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hoey (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, this is a very important Bill and I have supported it strongly. But before we finally complete Third Reading, I point out again to this House, as I did in Committee, that two clauses do not apply to part of the United Kingdom: Northern Ireland. We have been left under the European Union rules and will not be able to take advantage of these provisions.

Some new terminology was brought in, but although the provisions covered Northern Ireland, they would not apply to Northern Ireland. In terms of equal citizenship —because of what we did in leaving the European Union while leaving Northern Ireland out of that—Northern Ireland has once again been left out. That is a very sad reflection of the Conservative Government’s aim and promise that they believed in a United Kingdom and in the union.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend the Minister on the enthusiastic verve with which he has handled the whole of this legislation. We in the International Agreements Committee have been examining the detail of membership at considerable length for some time. Long before that, and long before Brexit many years ago, we were working to see our greater involvement in this pivot to south-east Asia and Latin America.

As the Minister said, this is a historic moment: we are entering now, with new opportunities, the fastest-growing markets of the next 30 years. Beyond that lie even bigger investment opportunities and markets which will ensure that we can maintain our own living standards in this country. This is a great move in the right direction, which will, if we work at it, bring enormous benefits.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend the Minister on securing the safe passage of the Bill. He is aware of the concern of farmers across North Yorkshire and the rest of the country about the Bill’s impact. I look forward to the increasing consumption of cheese, chocolate and whisky produced in all four parts of this country in all the countries that are party to the CPTPP—the whole thing; tout.

Can I raise two issues with my noble friend? Will he work very closely with Defra on the labelling of provisions when we eventually import products that may not meet the same standards of animal welfare and environmental protection that our farmers have to meet? Can I press him on his last comment on seeking the legislative consent of the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish? It is complex. Does he have a date—now that the Bill will pass to the other place—when that legislative consent will be granted?

Northern Ireland Investment Summit

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Thursday 23rd November 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I completely agree with the noble Baroness on the need to come to a conclusion over forming a stable political environment for businesses to invest in Northern Ireland. I reassure her that the United States is not the only market that invests heavily in Northern Ireland. Across the world, particularly in Asian countries such as Japan, there is enormous interest in taking advantage of the skills in Northern Ireland. It is not simply the opportunities presented by the Windsor Framework; it is the opportunities presented by the people of Northern Ireland and their brains and brilliance.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords—

[Lord Morrow (DUP)]

My Lords—

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Williams of Trafford (Con)]

My Lords, there is time for both noble Lords to come in, so we will hear from my noble friend first.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

I declare my interest as a former Minister of Commerce in Northern Ireland. Having travelled around the world raising interest in investment in Northern Ireland, I confirm what my noble friend has just said. There was immense attention to the sheer quality of the training and skills in Northern Ireland, particularly then in the aeronautical sector, in Harland & Wolff, and in a number of other high-tech electronic industries—Japan was especially interested. This was some decades ago, but now that we have a renewed and strong interest in links of every kind with Japan, is that aspect to be emphasised in Northern Ireland?

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I thank my noble friend for that point and I agree with him. We have a renewed staff level in Belfast to encourage this type of investment, and I hope that they will continue their excellent work.

Industrial Strategy

Lord Howell of Guildford Excerpts

Tuesday 20th June 2023 Lords Chamber

[The Earl of Minto (Con)]

My Lords, I think noble Lords will agree that this is a time for specialisation rather than a single, overarching, broad strategy. By targeting specifics, such as the five key growth sectors, we can be more effective and, in this age, more agile to respond to change.

[Lord Howell of Guildford (Con)]

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that a key component of a successful industrial strategy and growth is massive investment, both from foreign sources, on the scale we used to attract and are not attracting now, and of course from pension funds, which are managing trillions and are ready to invest? Does he agree that in the energy sector the attraction is going to be more to quick-build small modular reactors than to any large, rather out-of-date, massive giants which take years to build and are full of risks? Will he advise his friends, as a priority, to put all their efforts behind developing small nuclear reactors as part of our sensible energy strategy and our move to a decarbonised electric sector?