Lord Lester of Herne Hill

Non-affiliated - Life peer

Became Member: 13th October 1993

Left House: 12th December 2018 (Retired)


Lord Lester of Herne Hill is not a member of any APPGs
2 Former APPG memberships
Dalits, Legal and Constitutional Affairs
EU Justice Sub-Committee
17th Oct 2017 - 21st Nov 2018
Constitution Committee
12th Jun 2013 - 12th May 2016
Human Rights (Joint Committee)
3rd Jul 2001 - 30th Mar 2015
Procedure and Privileges Committee
23rd Nov 1994 - 17th Oct 1996


Division Voting information

Lord Lester of Herne Hill has voted in 509 divisions, and 23 times against the majority of their Party.

10 Jan 2018 - Data Protection Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 75 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 238 Noes - 209
10 Jan 2018 - Data Protection Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 73 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 217 Noes - 200
9 Dec 2014 - Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 26 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 52 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 304 Noes - 240
9 Dec 2014 - Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 23 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 47 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 274 Noes - 205
27 Oct 2014 - Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 16 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 42 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 181
27 Oct 2014 - Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 11 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 51 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 228 Noes - 195
27 Oct 2014 - Criminal Justice and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 16 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 48 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 219 Noes - 186
7 Apr 2014 - Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 11 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 51 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 282 Noes - 184
7 Apr 2014 - Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 23 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 39 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 242 Noes - 180
28 Oct 2013 - Energy Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 62 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 216
22 Apr 2013 - Growth and Infrastructure Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 17 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 47 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 260 Noes - 191
26 Mar 2013 - Justice and Security Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 26 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 27 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 158 Noes - 174
4 Mar 2013 - Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 33 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 256 Noes - 153
4 Mar 2013 - Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 45 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 167 Noes - 179
10 Jan 2013 - Administration and Works Committee - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 6 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 36 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 82 Noes - 163
23 Nov 2011 - Public Bodies Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 72 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 233 Noes - 236
15 Nov 2011 - Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 45 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 79 Noes - 273
8 Nov 2011 - Procedure of the House (Proposal 1) - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 27 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 29 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 169 Noes - 233
13 Jul 2011 - European Union Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 62 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 210 Noes - 244
13 Jul 2011 - European Union Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 54 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 215
15 Jun 2011 - Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 59 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 242 Noes - 209
15 Jun 2011 - Estates of Deceased Persons (Forfeiture Rule and Law of Succession) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 18 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 47 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 209 Noes - 203
21 Dec 2010 - Identity Documents Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Lester of Herne Hill voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 10 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 32 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 156 Noes - 112
View All Lord Lester of Herne Hill Division Votes

All Debates

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Department Debates
Ministry of Justice
(158 debate contributions)
Wales Office
(74 debate contributions)
Home Office
(69 debate contributions)
Department for Work and Pensions
(61 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
Legislation Debates
Digital Economy Act 2017
(5,228 words contributed)
Data Protection Act 2018
(3,365 words contributed)
Policing and Crime Act 2017
(946 words contributed)
Policing and Crime Act 2017
(946 words contributed)
View All Legislation Debates
View all Lord Lester of Herne Hill's debates

Lords initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Lord Lester of Herne Hill, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.


2 Bills introduced by Lord Lester of Herne Hill


Amend the law of defamation; and for connected purposes.

Lords - 40%

Last Event - 2nd Reading: House Of Lords
Friday 9th July 2010

A Bill to make provision about the property of deceased persons who are survived by a cohabitant.

Lords - 20%

Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Lords
Wednesday 11th January 2012

Lord Lester of Herne Hill has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


Latest 50 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
1 Other Department Questions
19th Oct 2017
To ask the Leader of the House what are the reasons for the delay in establishing the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights has now been appointed. The Lords membership was agreed by the House on Wednesday 19 July. The House of Commons agreed its members of the Joint Committee on Monday 30 October. The appointment of Commons Members is a matter for the House of Commons.

14th Dec 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to provide for a member of the House of Lords, as well as members of the House of Commons, to be entitled under the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill to make a complaint to the Ombudsman if authorised by the affected person to act on the affected person's behalf.

Clause 5 of the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill entitles any person who is authorised by the affected person to make a complaint to the Ombudsman on their behalf, including a member of the House of Lords.

14th Dec 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why the draft Public Service Ombudsman Bill, Cm 9374, published on 5 December, does not make provision for findings of maladministration and recommendations to be made binding on government departments and other public bodies.

The draft Bill requires the Ombudsman to send a statement setting out her findings and any recommendations to the department or public body in question. As now, it will be for the department or public body to decide whether and how to give effect to any such recommendations. The legislation retains existing powers that allow the Ombudsman to draw attention to unremedied hardship or injustice where she considers it has not been or will not be put right.

This is a significant power that includes the ability to require information about how a designated authority will respond to the Ombudsman's findings and to bring that information to the attention of others – for example, by laying the report before Parliament or sending it to members of a local authority.

1st Mar 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether local authorities that engage in foreign boycotts risk acting in breach of the common law as well as the UK's regime of procurement rules.

On 17 February, the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) published procurement guidance for public authorities that makes clear that boycotts in public procurement are inappropriate outside where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the UK Government.

This new guidance gives no consideration to matters of common law, which is a matter for the courts. However, the guidance makes it clear that local level boycotts can be unlawful and lead to severe penalties against the contracting authority and the Government.

25th Feb 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will give guidance to local authorities about the limits on their powers to engage in political boycotts overseas.

On 17 February, the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) published procurement guidance for public authorities that makes clear that boycotts in public procurement are inappropriate outside where formal legal sanctions, embargoes and restrictions have been put in place by the UK Government.

This new guidance gives no consideration to matters of common law, which is a matter for the courts. However, the guidance makes it clear that local level boycotts can be unlawful and lead to severe penalties against the contracting authority and the Government.

4th Feb 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Bridges of Headley on 3 February (HL4852), whether they aim to release the official records from 1987 relating to the ban on the publication of <i>Spycatcher</i> that year; and if not, when they expect those records will be released to the National Archives under the 20-year rule.

As set out in my answer to the noble Lord on 3 February, the Cabinet Office is actively reviewing its remaining 1987 and 1988 files and is seeking to complete this work as quickly as possible. It would be premature to comment about what will be released until this work is complete.

17th Nov 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what criteria they use to process requests for the disclosure of information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

The Government is committed to transparency and the Freedom of Information Act. Requests for information are examined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

26th Oct 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether Ministers are under a duty to comply with international law including treaties signed and ratified on behalf of the United Kingdom.

I refer the Noble Lord to the answer given to the Noble Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 5 November 2015 to HL3046,HL3047,HL3048,which I have attached for ease of reference.


The Ministerial Code is normally updated and reissued after a General Election. The updated Code makes clear that Ministers must abide by the law. The obligations of Ministers under the law including international law remain unchanged.


Information relating to internal discussions and advice is not disclosed.

26th Oct 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government why they have amended the Ministerial Code to remove the duty to comply with international law and treaty obligations.

I refer the Noble Lord to the answer given to the Noble Lord Falconer of Thoroton on 5 November 2015 to HL3046,HL3047,HL3048,which I have attached for ease of reference.


The Ministerial Code is normally updated and reissued after a General Election. The updated Code makes clear that Ministers must abide by the law. The obligations of Ministers under the law including international law remain unchanged.


Information relating to internal discussions and advice is not disclosed.

2nd Feb 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government who is responsible for deciding the terms of service of the Chair and members of the Chilcot inquiry.

The Prime Minister of the day appointed the Chair and Committee Members of the Iraq Inquiry. The Cabinet Office, as the sponsor department, is responsible for the terms of service for the Chair and Committee members of the Iraq Inquiry.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
2nd Feb 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what financial or other incentives are in place to ensure that the Chair and members of the Chilcot inquiry complete their work within a reasonable time.

Members of the Inquiry Committee are paid a daily rate with no bonus incentives. Sir John Chilcot has said that he and his colleagues intend to deliver their report to the Prime Minister as soon as it is possible to do so.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
22nd Jan 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what are the daily fees paid to the chair and members of the Chilcot inquiry; and on what terms are they paid.

The Maxwellisation process is a matter for the Inquiry; Sir John Chilcot has described the process as essential and confidential, and to comment further might jeopardise the confidentiality of the process. Once his report is complete, Sir John Chilcot will deliver it to the Prime Minister. It is for Government to publish the report, and once it is delivered we expect to publish without delay.

The daily fees for the Chair and Members of the Inquiry are published on the Inquiry’s website.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
4th Nov 2014
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what remuneration is currently paid per day to each member of the Chilcot Inquiry.

Members of the Inquiry are paid at the following rates: Chairman - £790 per working day; Committee members - £565 per working day. These rates have not changed since the beginning of the Inquiry.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
16th Jul 2014
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Wallace of Saltaire on 15 July (WA 114), what steps they are taking to ensure that the Chilcot inquiry report is published before the General Election.

The Chairman of the Inquiry is paid £790 per day and the members of his committee £565 per day. The Chairman and members are only paid for days that they work. These figures have not changed since the beginning of the Inquiry. In financial year 2013/14, the Committee and Advisers’ remuneration was £201,100.

I have nothing further to add to my written answer of 15 July 2014.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
16th Jul 2014
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what daily fees are paid to the chairman and each member of the Chilcot inquiry; for how many days they have been paid; and what has been the total expenditure on the inquiry so far.

The Chairman of the Inquiry is paid £790 per day and the members of his committee £565 per day. The Chairman and members are only paid for days that they work. These figures have not changed since the beginning of the Inquiry. In financial year 2013/14, the Committee and Advisers’ remuneration was £201,100.

I have nothing further to add to my written answer of 15 July 2014.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
27th Jun 2014
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the report of the Chilcot inquiry is likely to be published before the next General Election.

The Inquiry is independent of Government, and the timing of the delivery of its report to the Prime Minister is a matter for the Inquiry. Sir John Chilcot said in May that it was the Inquiry's intention to do so as soon as possible. Government is doing everything it can to ensure this is possible.

Lord Wallace of Saltaire
Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson (Cabinet Office)
18th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the Euratom Supply Agency.

The European Supply Agency forms part of Euratom Treaty arrangements. The UK will leave the European Supply Agency at the same time that it leaves Euratom.

The nature of future arrangements with Euratom and the EU will be subject to negotiation which started this month. Our aim throughout the negotiations with the European Commission will be to maintain our mutually successful civil nuclear cooperation with Euratom and the rest of the world.

The UK is keen to ensure that there is minimal disruption to civil nuclear trade following the UK’s withdrawal from Euratom. We have bilateral Nuclear Cooperation Agreements (NCAs) in place with several countries that we will continue to rely on after our exit from Euratom.

We intend to maintain continuity of cooperation with our international partners and will develop new arrangements as necessary.

18th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the Euratom Joint Undertaking for ITER and the Development of Fusion Energy.

The EU’s Joint Undertaking for ITER (F4E) funds the €540m p.a. EU contribution to the ITER programme. This is funded primarily through the EU central budget with small additional membership fees from member states. The UK pays a €290,000 annual membership fee directly to F4E.

UK membership of F4E gives UK scientists and engineers the opportunity to work at, and in partnership with, ITER on development of fusion as a clean, safe and virtually inexhaustible energy source. It also gives the UK access to intellectual property developed at ITER and helps the UK maintain its position as a world leader in fusion technology.

F4E membership has enabled the UK to win high-value ITER construction contracts, with opportunities to bid for significantly more during the construction which has a current budget of €14.4bn overall and will be complete in 2025.

17th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators.

Within the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators budget it is not possible to identify the membership costs for any individual member state. Details of their costs and the work they do are set out in their Programming Document[1] for 2017-2019.

In common with other EU agencies, as part of exit negotiations the government will discuss with the EU any potential future relationship with the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators.

[1] http://www.acer.europa.eu/en/The_agency/Mission_and_Objectives/Documents/ACER%20Programming%20Document%202017-September%202016.pdf

11th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the European Global Navigation Satellite Systems Agency.

The European Global Navigation Satellite Systems Agency is funded from the European Union budget. It is a Union Agency established to deliver the EU’s satellite navigation programmes Galileo and EGNOS. The Agency will be responsible for operating the systems, managing the services provided and for promoting their adoption to create new industrial markets.

The Government recognises the benefits our involvement in these programmes brings for the UK.

10th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the European Union Intellectual Property Office.

The Government recognises the importance of an effective and balanced intellectual property regime to support the UK's innovative and creative industries and to make the UK an attractive place for inward investment.

In order to inform our position in the upcoming negotiations with the EU, the Government continues to undertake a rigorous and extensive programme of analysis, which includes intellectual property. The UK's future relationship with the EUIPO will be a matter for negotiations and so it would not be appropriate for me to discuss the details of any analysis now.

4th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.

The European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions (Eurofound) informs and contributes towards better evidence-based policymaking in areas relevant to living and working conditions.

Eurofound is funded from a central EU budget and the UK has not made any additional voluntary financial contributions to the foundation.

Since the EU referendum vote, the UK has continued to participate in Eurofound. Future engagement between the UK and Eurofound will be considered as part of the broader EU exit negotiations.

3rd Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government whether they intend that the UK will continue to have access to the Internal Market Information System database.

In leaving the EU, we want to achieve the best possible outcome and the strongest possible partnership – one that works for the UK and the EU. Good communication between our respective authorities will be important to securing this partnership. The future relationship between UK authorities and information sharing mechanisms such as the Internal Market Information System, will be determined in the course of our negotiations with the EU.

1st Mar 2017
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they intend to take in response to the recommendations by Baroness McGregor-Smith in her report <i>Race in the workplace</i> to eliminate racial discrimination in the workplace.

The business case for action has been made. While we know that many companies are already taking forward some of the recommended actions, more needs to be done. We set out in the Government response that we will be working with Business in the Community in supporting companies to make these changes including developing a simple guide on how to discuss race in the workplace, ensuring easy access to an online portal of best practice and celebrating success through a list of the top 100 BME employers. We will also monitor progress through the new Diversity and Inclusion Group, chaired by my hon. Friend the Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Corporate Responsibility.

1st Mar 2017
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the statement by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 28 February (GC 207), what criteria will be used to monitor whether sufficient progress is made in giving effect to the recommendations by Baroness McGregor-Smith in her report <i>Race in the workplace </i>to eliminate racial discrimination in employment.

The Government welcomes Baroness McGregor-Smith’s report and encourages businesses to take forward her recommendations. The practicalities of implementation will differ depending on the business in question, but as we set out in the Government response, we will be working with Business in the Community in supporting companies to make these changes. My hon. Friend the Minister for Small Business, Consumers and Corporate Responsibility has also announced that she will chair a new Business Diversity and Inclusion Group which will bring together some of the key figures leading work on this agenda to provide strategic leadership and ensure that we deliver a clear and coherent message to the business community on what they are expected to do.

10th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the benefits and costs to the UK of membership of the European Network and Information Security Agency.

Membership of the European Network and Information Security Agency (ENISA) is one of the ways in which the UK discusses cyber security policy and shares expertise with European partners.

In 2016, ENISA received €10.1m of central funding from the EU budget. The UK contributes to the budget as a whole, not to individual projects or agencies.

25th Oct 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the letter of 20 October by Lord Ashton of Hyde concerning the draft BBC Charter and Agreement which has been placed in the Library of the House, whether they intend to ensure that the regulatory powers conferred on OFCOM and the National Audit Office in relation to the BBC will be exercised in a way that is compatible with the principles of legal certainty, fairness and proportionality protected by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act.

Public authorities must act in a manner compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. The government expects that the NAO and Ofcom would seek to act in a way which is compatible with the Convention, but of course it is a matter for them to discharge their obligations.​

25th Oct 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the letter of 20 October by Lord Ashton of Hyde concerning the draft BBC Charter and Agreement which has been placed in the Library of the House, whether they intend to ensure that the licence fee is for the exclusive benefit and use by the BBC to fund the performance of the BBC's functions and public purposes.

The licence fee is not a payment for BBC Services or any other specific television service. ​The government will trial a contestable fund to benefit underserved audiences and genres​​, funded from broadband underspend, over the coming three years.

The Government will consult on the fund in due course. ​

25th Oct 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the letter of 20 October by Lord Ashton of Hyde concerning the draft BBC Charter and Agreement which has been placed in the Library of the House, whether they intend to make available to the BBC sufficient funds, through the licence fee, to enable the BBC to perform its functions and public purposes as a public service broadcaster.

The summer 2015 funding settlement represents a positive financial outcome for the BBC. The licence fee will rise over the next 5 years and by 2022 the BBC will have received around £18 billion of public money. ​ The BBC has welcomed this funding settlement. ​

25th Oct 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the letter of 20 October by Lord Ashton of Hyde concerning the draft BBC Charter and Agreement which has been placed in the Library of the House, whether they intend to ensure that the BBC is able to operate independently from Ministers and other public authorities in the UK.

The draft Charter and Agreement​ strengthen the independence of the BBC by giving it a powerful new unitary board, with the BBC able to appoint the majority of board members for the first time​, one of the longest charter periods in history, fewer protected areas of funding to increase the freedom the BBC has to use its money as it sees fit, and a new system of regular 5 yearly licence fee settlements.

9th Sep 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government when the draft BBC Charter and Agreement will be laid before Parliament.

The BBC's draft Charter and Framework Agreement published was published on Thursday 15th September.

18th Apr 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether EU laws on telecommunications and media protect freedom of the press and freedom of expression.

EU laws on telecommunications (electronic communications services) exclude services that provide, or exercise editorial control over content transmitted using electronic communications networks and services. While printed media (e.g. newspapers) are not within the scope of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive, the Directive does apply to audio visual media, (television broadcasts and other tv-like content). The Government has considered the impact of the Directive on freedom of expression when responding to the European Commission's consultation on the future of that Directive. The Government's response is attached.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
11th Mar 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the appropriate level for the BBC licence fee and of the case for that level being recommended by an independent regulator.

The BBC Charter Review Consultation Paper, published in July 2015, set out the issues for consideration in Charter Review, including questions about how the BBC is funded. The Government will set out its proposals in the forthcoming White Paper, but remains clear that the licence fee is a tax and therefore should ultimately be decided by Ministers. The level of the licence fee will be agreed once questions on the BBC's scope and purposes, have been agreed.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
11th Mar 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for maintaining the scale and scope of the BBC's coverage on all platforms.

These issues are being considered as part of Charter Review. The Government will set out its proposals in the forthcoming White Paper.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
11th Mar 2016
BBC
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for the BBC's service licences being reviewed and strengthened by an independent regulator at an early date.

These issues are being considered as part of Charter Review. The Government will set out its proposals in the forthcoming White Paper.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
11th Mar 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the BBC new board members should (1) be appointed without ministerial influence, and (2) include audience and staff representatives.

These issues are being considered as part of Charter Review. The Government will set out its proposals in the forthcoming White Paper.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
11th Mar 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the BBC's Royal Charter should be for at least 10 years.

These issues are being considered as part of Charter Review. The Government will set out its proposals in the forthcoming White Paper.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
25th Jan 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they will take to ensure that the BBC Charter is debated by both House of Parliament before it is brought into effect.

I will ensure that there is an opportunity for the BBC Charter to be debated by both Houses of Parliament before it is brought into effect.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
21st Jan 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 13 January (HL4703 and HL4074), by what means they give public access to the grounds for retention linked to retention instruments in order to explain which official records are being withheld from transfer to the National Archives and why.

I refer the noble Lord to the responses to HL4703 and HL4704. The attached Access to Public Records Manual is published by The National Archives and sets out the grounds for retention.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
18th Jan 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 13 January (HL4703 and HL4704), whether the decisions not to transfer records to the National Archive were in each case in accordance with the advice given by the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives, and in each case what that advice was.

Yes, all decisions were made in accordance with the advice by the Advisory Council.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
18th Jan 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 13 January (HL4703 and HL4704), what were the other administrative reasons for retaining documents to which she refers.

The administrative grounds for retaining public records referred to in my answer to HL4703 are: records or series of records which have not been selected for transfer to The National Archives or a place of deposit, but which the department has retained after they are defined as historical records because they are required for its own administrative purposes; records or series of records that have been selected for transfer to The National Archives or place of deposit but are still required for administrative purposes; records or series of records which are awaiting appraisal or preparation for transfer.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
14th Jan 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 13 January (HL4703 and HL4704), whether they will place in the Library of the House a list of the grounds for retention linked to the relevant retention instruments.

I refer the noble Lord to the response to HL4704.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
17th Dec 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 15 December (HL3615), whether they will place retention instruments 111 to 119 in the Library of the House.

As set out in the Public Records Act 1958 (as amended), public records selected for permanent preservation are transferred toThe National Archives or an approved place of deposit no later than 20 years after creation, unless an department is authorised to keep them for longer. Such decisions are undertakenwithadvice from the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives.

The Access to Public Records Manual published by the National Archives sets out the seven broad grounds for retention, which is attached.

Retention instruments can cover multiple applicationsby departments to retain records and the number of applications covered by Lord Chancellor's Instruments 111-119 ranges from 37 to 253, which were submitted by between 8 and 15 departments.


The grounds provided by departments that were given permission to retain records under Instruments 111, 113, 114 and 119 are 1,2,4 and 6. Records under Instruments 112, 115, 117 and 118 were retained on grounds 1, 4 and 6 and records under Instrument 116 were retained on grounds 4 and 6. Each of the Instruments therefore covers documents retained on grounds of national security, as well as other administrative reasons.


There is a strong public interest in not releasing information which could undermine the safeguarding of national security.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
17th Dec 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Neville-Rolfe on 15 December (HL3615), in respect of each retention instrument, what were the reasons for deciding not to transfer records to the National Archives, and what was the subject matter of each instrument.

As set out in the Public Records Act 1958 (as amended), public records selected for permanent preservation are transferred toThe National Archives or an approved place of deposit no later than 20 years after creation, unless an department is authorised to keep them for longer. Such decisions are undertakenwithadvice from the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives.

The Access to Public Records Manual published by the National Archives sets out the seven broad grounds for retention, which is attached.


Retention instruments can cover multiple applicationsby departments to retain records and the number of applications covered by Lord Chancellor's Instruments 111-119 ranges from 37 to 253, which were submitted by between 8 and 15 departments.


The grounds provided by departments that were given permission to retain records under Instruments 111, 113, 114 and 119 are 1,2,4 and 6. Records under Instruments 112, 115, 117 and 118 were retained on grounds 1, 4 and 6 and records under Instrument 116 were retained on grounds 4 and 6. Each of the Instruments therefore covers documents retained on grounds of national security, as well as other administrative reasons.


There is a strong public interest in not releasing information which could undermine the safeguarding of national security.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
17th Nov 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government which instruments have been used to grant exemptions from deposit in the National Archives under the Public Records Act 1958 since the introduction of the rule that closed records should be deposited after 20 years.

Departments that wish to physically retain custody of records for an administrative or other reason (such as national security) for longer than the prescribed period require a retention instrument.

Since 2013, when the Government began its move towards transferring records to the National Archives when they are 20 years old, rather than 30, retention instrument numbers 111 to 119 have been approved.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
22nd Jul 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to take action to secure the right of same-sex couples to marry in Northern Ireland, in the light of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on 21 July in <i>Oliari and Others v Italy</i>.

Within the United Kingdom’s constitutional arrangements, responsibility for legislating on the subject of marriage in relation to Northern Ireland has been devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly and any change in the law is a matter for that Assembly. The situation in Italy is not comparable with the situation in Northern Ireland where civil partnerships are available to same-sex couples. Italy provides no legal recognition of same-sex relationships either through a civil union/registered partnership or through marriage.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Shadow Chief Whip (Lords)
16th Jul 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 15 July (HL Deb, col 572), whether they plan to publish the result of their consideration of the caste duty, and the meaning and effect of the judgment in <i>Chandhok and Anor v Tirkey (Race Discrimination) </i>[2014] UKEAT 0190_14_1912.

In my answers to Noble Lords’ questions on 15 July, I sought to make clear that we understand the Employment Appeal Tribunal judgment in Chandhok and Anor v Tirkey as providing an existing legal remedy for claims of caste-based discrimination. We will keep the House informed of further developments in our consideration of the effect of this judgment on the caste duty.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Shadow Chief Whip (Lords)