Lord Meston Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for Lord Meston

Information between 17th March 2026 - 16th April 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
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted No and against the House
One of 20 Crossbench No votes vs 24 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 231 Noes - 188
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 19 Crossbench Aye votes vs 25 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 225 Noes - 189
23 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and against the House
One of 12 Crossbench Aye votes vs 9 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 77 Noes - 161
23 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and against the House
One of 34 Crossbench Aye votes vs 2 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 225
23 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted No and against the House
One of 13 Crossbench No votes vs 6 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 241 Noes - 175
24 Mar 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 31 Crossbench Aye votes vs 7 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 285 Noes - 156
25 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 53 Crossbench Aye votes vs 4 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 306 Noes - 145
25 Mar 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Meston voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 30 Crossbench Aye votes vs 4 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 266 Noes - 141
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


Speeches
Lord Meston speeches from: Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
Lord Meston contributed 2 speeches (283 words)
Wednesday 25th March 2026 - Lords Chamber
Department for Work and Pensions


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.




Lord Meston mentioned

Live Transcript

Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm.

25 Mar 2026, 6:14 p.m. - House of Lords
"and learned Lord Meston, where committed to doing best practice in helping children to see their "
Baroness Blake of Leeds (Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
25 Mar 2026, 5:38 p.m. - House of Lords
"if I may, to the noble and learned Lord Lord Meston I think there are "
Baroness Barran (Conservative) - View Video - View Transcript


Parliamentary Debates
Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill
107 speeches (21,672 words)
Wednesday 25th March 2026 - Lords Chamber
Department for Work and Pensions
Mentions:
1: Baroness Barran (Con - Life peer) To the noble Lord, Lord Meston, I say that there are multiple pathfinders, and the one to which he referred—the - Link to Speech
2: Baroness Blake of Leeds (Lab - Life peer) absolutely clear and I very much welcome the support of noble Lords, including the noble Lord, Lord Meston - Link to Speech



Select Committee Documents
Friday 27th March 2026
Report - Fifty-second 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




Lord Meston - Select Committee Information

Select Committee Documents
Friday 27th March 2026
Report - Fifty-second Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
Friday 17th April 2026
Report - Fifty-third Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
Friday 24th April 2026
Report - Fifty-fourth Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

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

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
Tuesday 28th April 2026
Report - Fifty-fifth Report - 2 Statutory Instruments Reported

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
Tuesday 28th April 2026
Formal Minutes - Formal minutes Session 2024-26

Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)