Lord Meston Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for Lord Meston

Information between 31st March 2026 - 30th May 2026

Note: This sample does not contain the most recent 2 weeks of information. Up to date samples can only be viewed by Subscribers.
Click here to view Subscription options.


Division Votes
15 Apr 2026 - Victims and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted No and in line with the House
One of 32 Crossbench No votes vs 12 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 209 Noes - 260
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 31 Crossbench Aye votes vs 9 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 169
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted No and against the House
One of 22 Crossbench No votes vs 17 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 259 Noes - 180
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 39 Crossbench Aye votes vs 5 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 284 Noes - 158
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 16 Crossbench Aye votes vs 15 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 220 Noes - 143
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 8 Crossbench Aye votes vs 12 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 197 Noes - 144
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted No and against the House
One of 14 Crossbench No votes vs 6 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 199 Noes - 146
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 17 Crossbench Aye votes vs 10 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 208 Noes - 138
27 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 52 Crossbench Aye votes vs 7 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 316 Noes - 165


Speeches
Lord Meston speeches from: Burial Provision in England and Wales
Lord Meston contributed 1 speech (74 words)
Wednesday 22nd April 2026 - Lords Chamber
Ministry of Justice


Written Answers
Civil Proceedings: Third Party Financing
Asked by: Lord Meston (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Tuesday 7th April 2026

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to (1) implement the findings of the Civil Justice Council's Review of Litigation Funding (2 June 2025), and (2) legislate in response to R (PACCAR Inc and Others) v. Competition Appeal Tribunal [2023] UKSC 28, and by when.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government intends to accept the two key recommendations of the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review:

We will legislate to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment by clarifying that Litigation Funding Agreements are not Damages-Based Agreements and will introduce proportionate regulation of Litigation Funding Agreements.

We intend to legislate to implement these changes when parliamentary time allows. Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations in more detail.

We recognise the importance of maintaining access to justice, whilst avoiding issues stemming from speculative or unmeritorious claims. The new regulations will take a balanced and holistic approach; this involves appropriate consideration of the position of claimants and defendants and the courts, as well as the legal and litigation funding sectors.

The regulations will complement existing safeguards preventing speculative and disproportionate litigation, such as the power, provided in Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for the court to dismiss any claim which has no reasonable grounds.

The Government is confident that the CJC has appropriately reviewed litigation funding and thus we have not found it necessary to make our own formal assessment of the potential impact of third-party funded collective actions on court capacity, judicial workload, or case duration. We also do not hold data relating to the costs to the public sector of third-party funded collective actions.

Civil Proceedings: Third Party Financing
Asked by: Lord Meston (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Tuesday 7th April 2026

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of increased third-party funded collective actions on (1) court capacity, (2) judicial workload, and (3) case duration.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government intends to accept the two key recommendations of the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review:

We will legislate to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment by clarifying that Litigation Funding Agreements are not Damages-Based Agreements and will introduce proportionate regulation of Litigation Funding Agreements.

We intend to legislate to implement these changes when parliamentary time allows. Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations in more detail.

We recognise the importance of maintaining access to justice, whilst avoiding issues stemming from speculative or unmeritorious claims. The new regulations will take a balanced and holistic approach; this involves appropriate consideration of the position of claimants and defendants and the courts, as well as the legal and litigation funding sectors.

The regulations will complement existing safeguards preventing speculative and disproportionate litigation, such as the power, provided in Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for the court to dismiss any claim which has no reasonable grounds.

The Government is confident that the CJC has appropriately reviewed litigation funding and thus we have not found it necessary to make our own formal assessment of the potential impact of third-party funded collective actions on court capacity, judicial workload, or case duration. We also do not hold data relating to the costs to the public sector of third-party funded collective actions.

Civil Proceedings: Third Party Financing
Asked by: Lord Meston (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Tuesday 7th April 2026

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to publish data on the total costs of third-party funded collective actions to the public sector.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government intends to accept the two key recommendations of the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review:

We will legislate to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment by clarifying that Litigation Funding Agreements are not Damages-Based Agreements and will introduce proportionate regulation of Litigation Funding Agreements.

We intend to legislate to implement these changes when parliamentary time allows. Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations in more detail.

We recognise the importance of maintaining access to justice, whilst avoiding issues stemming from speculative or unmeritorious claims. The new regulations will take a balanced and holistic approach; this involves appropriate consideration of the position of claimants and defendants and the courts, as well as the legal and litigation funding sectors.

The regulations will complement existing safeguards preventing speculative and disproportionate litigation, such as the power, provided in Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for the court to dismiss any claim which has no reasonable grounds.

The Government is confident that the CJC has appropriately reviewed litigation funding and thus we have not found it necessary to make our own formal assessment of the potential impact of third-party funded collective actions on court capacity, judicial workload, or case duration. We also do not hold data relating to the costs to the public sector of third-party funded collective actions.

Civil Proceedings: Third Party Financing
Asked by: Lord Meston (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Tuesday 7th April 2026

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps what they are taking to ensure that any policy they have on litigation funding does not lead to any inappropriate use of court time or resources.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government intends to accept the two key recommendations of the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review:

We will legislate to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment by clarifying that Litigation Funding Agreements are not Damages-Based Agreements and will introduce proportionate regulation of Litigation Funding Agreements.

We intend to legislate to implement these changes when parliamentary time allows. Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations in more detail.

We recognise the importance of maintaining access to justice, whilst avoiding issues stemming from speculative or unmeritorious claims. The new regulations will take a balanced and holistic approach; this involves appropriate consideration of the position of claimants and defendants and the courts, as well as the legal and litigation funding sectors.

The regulations will complement existing safeguards preventing speculative and disproportionate litigation, such as the power, provided in Part 3 of the Civil Procedure Rules, for the court to dismiss any claim which has no reasonable grounds.

The Government is confident that the CJC has appropriately reviewed litigation funding and thus we have not found it necessary to make our own formal assessment of the potential impact of third-party funded collective actions on court capacity, judicial workload, or case duration. We also do not hold data relating to the costs to the public sector of third-party funded collective actions.

Legal Costs: Reviews
Asked by: Lord Meston (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Wednesday 29th April 2026

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government, in the context of the Civil Justice Council's review of litigation funding and the Government's plans to regulate litigation funding, (1) what definition of litigation funding agreements they propose to adopt; (2) whether portfolio funding will be regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority as a form of loan in line with the Council's recommendation 28, or under any proposed litigation funding regulations; and (3) what steps they are taking to ensure that both forms of funding are subject to appropriate and distinct regulatory oversight.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

The Government welcomes the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review and is carefully considering all its recommendations.

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government’s priority is to accept the CJC’s two primary recommendations and legislate to clarify that Litigation Funding Agreements (LFAs) are not Damages-Based Agreements and introduce light-touch regulation of LFAs. As we determine the appropriate form of regulation, we will consider the most suitable definition of a LFA. We will continue to engage with stakeholders as we develop this policy to ensure that any future framework provides for proportionate and effective regulation.

Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations, including those relating to portfolio funding, in more detail. We will provide further information in due course.




Lord Meston mentioned

Select Committee Documents
Tuesday 28th April 2026
Formal Minutes - Formal minutes Session 2024-26

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)

Found: Atkinson Lord Beith Lord Chartres Mark Ferguson Claire Hughes Charlie Maynard Gordon McKee Lord Meston

Tuesday 28th April 2026
Special Report - 3rd Special Report - Scrutinising Statutory Instruments: Departmental Returns, Session 2024-26

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)

Found: Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench; Life peer) Baroness Kennedy of Cradley (Labour; Life peer) Lord Meston

Tuesday 28th April 2026
Report - Fifty-fifth Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)

Found: Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench; Life peer) Baroness Kennedy of Cradley (Labour; Life peer) Lord Meston

Friday 24th April 2026
Report - Fifty-fourth Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)

Found: Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench; Life peer) Baroness Kennedy of Cradley (Labour; Life peer) Lord Meston

Friday 17th April 2026
Report - Fifty-third Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)

Found: Lord Carter of Haslemere (Crossbench; Life peer) Baroness Kennedy of Cradley (Labour; Life peer) Lord Meston



Deposited Papers
Thursday 21st May 2026
Ministry of Justice
Source Page: I. Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental responsibility and potential future children, as raised during the Victims and Courts Bill report stage debate. 2p. II. Letter dated 21/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to the Deposited papers clerk regarding deposit in the House libraries. 1p.
Document: Letter_to_Baroness_Brinton_BLKC.pdf (PDF)

Found: Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental

Thursday 21st May 2026
Ministry of Justice
Source Page: I. Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental responsibility and potential future children, as raised during the Victims and Courts Bill report stage debate. 2p. II. Letter dated 21/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to the Deposited papers clerk regarding deposit in the House libraries. 1p.
Document: Letter_to_Lord_Meston_BLKC.pdf (PDF)

Found: Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental

Thursday 21st May 2026
Ministry of Justice
Source Page: I. Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental responsibility and potential future children, as raised during the Victims and Courts Bill report stage debate. 2p. II. Letter dated 21/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to the Deposited papers clerk regarding deposit in the House libraries. 1p.
Document: Victims_and_Courts_Bill_Letter_to_Deposit.pdf (PDF)

Found: Letters dated 07/05/2026 from Baroness Levitt to Lord Meston and Baroness Brinton regarding parental