Lord Patten

Age discrimination that cannot be objectively justified is unacceptable and unlawful across a range of fields under the Equality Act 2010. It is the strong protections in the 2010 Act that enable older people and their representatives to challenge such unlawful behaviour and ultimately seek redress in the courts or, in the case of older workers, an employment tribunal.

In addition, as regards to the public sector, the Public Sector Equality Duty places a duty on Government Departments, local authorities, the NHS and other bodies to have due regard to meeting equality requirements, including to eliminate unlawful age discrimination, where this is relevant to their policies and activities.

Age discrimination complaints to an Employment Tribunal stood at 2,434 in the year prior to the pandemic (2019/20) and fell slightly to 2080 in the 12 months to June 2023.

Age discrimination that cannot be objectively justified is unacceptable and unlawful across a range of fields under the Equality Act 2010. It is the strong protections in the 2010 Act that enable older people and their representatives to challenge such unlawful behaviour and ultimately seek redress in the courts or, in the case of older workers, an employment tribunal.

In addition, as regards to the public sector, the Public Sector Equality Duty places a duty on Government Departments, local authorities, the NHS and other bodies to have due regard to meeting equality requirements, including to eliminate unlawful age discrimination, where this is relevant to their policies and activities.

Age discrimination complaints to an Employment Tribunal stood at 2,434 in the year prior to the pandemic (2019/20) and fell slightly to 2080 in the 12 months to June 2023.

Published costs for inquiries can be found on inquiry websites, as well as in the National Archives.

Public Inquiries shed light on injustices of the past, provide a means for victims and survivors to finally have their voices heard, and can help to rebuild trust in national institutions. The Government also recognises that there is growing criticism of the cost of inquiries, and is considering whether there are changes that could enable inquiries to deliver outcomes and enable lessons to be learnt more swiftly and at lower cost. This is a substantial piece of work, led by the Cabinet Office, that will aim to improve how we identify wrongs, and get to the truth more quickly. We will continue to keep Parliament updated on this important subject.

Data on Civil Service Headquarters (HQ) occupancy is collected and published quarterly on GOV.UK for all HQ buildings of Whitehall Departments, Office for Scotland, Office for Wales and Northern Ireland Office.

Data for the latest period for which data is available is copied below. No other information on occupancy data or workforce attendance is gathered centrally.

Departments manage their own arrangements for monitoring workforce attendance. Heads of departments have agreed that 60% minimum office attendance for most staff continues to be the best balance of working for the Civil Service.

This government remains committed to apprenticeships as one pathway to break down barriers to opportunity. It is for individual departments to identify the need and assess effectiveness of apprenticeships, including degree apprenticeships, within their workforce and development plans.

The delivery of compensation is a matter for the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA).

IBCA has opened the service to those who are living with infection, registered with a support scheme, and prioritising those who are nearing the end of their lives within this cohort. IBCA is contacting an average of 100 people every week so start their claim. At that rate, they expect to have contacted all those who are living with infection and registered with a support scheme this calendar year.

IBCA is taking a ‘test and learn’ approach to the delivery of compensation. By starting small, they are able to improve the service they deliver, which means that compensation can be paid to everyone faster.

As of 15th July, IBCA has contacted 2, 215 people to start their compensation claim, and 1,934 people have started the claim process. 808 offers of compensation have been made, totalling over £602 million, and so far 587 people have accepted their offers with more than £411 million paid in compensation.

I refer the noble Lord to the answer of HL8364 given on 25 June 2025:

Lord Patten: To ask His Majesty's Government what period of time is meant by the phrase “in a generation” in their Plan for Change published on 5 December 2024.

Baroness Anderson answered: The use of the term “in a generation” in the Plan for Change is consistent with language used in other government documents to indicate ambitious reform. Milestones for this Parliament have been clearly set out.

When we came into government we inherited a compensation system that was widely seen as too slow, too legalistic and too adversarial. In addition, significant numbers of victims were not covered by the redress schemes then in existence.

As of 30 June 2025, approximately £1,098 million has been paid in total redress to over 7,900 claimants. This represents a fourfold increase since July 2024, with more than 5,000 victims receiving compensation for the first time.

However, there is still more to do, and the recent publication of the first volume of the Horizon IT Inquiry report gives clear recommendations on how we can improve this further.

We do not have any plans to conduct an analysis of the impact of home working in isolation. However, we will monitor the impact of the flexible working reforms which came into force in April 2024, and further changes planned though the Employment Rights Bill.

The Government has established a Central AI Risk Function (CAIRF), which brings together policymakers and AI experts with a mission to continuously identify, assess and prepare for AI associated risks.

CAIRF develops and maintains the UK Government’s AI Risk Register. The register is actively maintained by CAIRF to identify individual risks associated with AI that could impact the UK spanning national security, the economy and society.

In addition, the AI Security Institute's (AISI) work is part of this Government's efforts to tackle security threats from AI. AISI evaluates both closed and open-sourced AI models to assess the risks AI poses to security and public safety.

We are also mindful that open source can boost transparency and support AI safety research. The UK Government will carefully balance these important benefits alongside risks as it develops its regulatory approach.

Universities have responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010 to make reasonable adjustments for all their disabled students where necessary. Reasonable adjustments are offered at the discretion of the university based on an assessment of a student's individual needs.

In England, the management of university exams is guided by a combination of national regulatory bodies, university-specific policies and sector-wide frameworks.

The Office for Students (OfS) is the independent regulator for higher education in England. While it does not set specific exam rules, its conditions of registration ensure that universities maintain high academic standards and fair assessment practices. It requires institutions to uphold principles of fairness, transparency and accessibility in assessments.

The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education provides the UK Quality Code for Higher Education, outlining expectations for academic standards and quality. This includes guidance on assessment design, marking and academic integrity.

Each university is autonomous and sets its own assessment regulations, including:

• Exam formats.
• Marking and grading criteria.
• Procedures for mitigating circumstances.
• Reasonable adjustments which a student might require.

The department does not have evidence which suggests that reasonable adjustments are impacting the integrity of exams or assessments and have no current plans to conduct a survey on the integrity of university examinations.

Information on the number of care leavers is submitted to the department on an annual basis and is published in our statistical release, which can be found here: https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/children-looked-after-in-england-including-adoptions.

The department publishes figures on the number of care leavers who have died in this age range in the methodology document accompanying this statistical release in the section ‘Data Quality and Uses’ (‘Care leavers aged 17, 18, 19, 20 or 21 years’). Information for 2022 to 2024 can be found in the attached table 1.

The department does not hold information centrally on the cause of death, the mental health of the care leaver or any details of past history of sexual abuse.

The total number of 18 to 21-year-old care leavers and the number and proportion of care leavers who are not in education, training and employment is shown in table 2.

Cheating of any kind is unacceptable. It threatens to undermine the reputation of our world-class higher education (HE) sector and devalues the hard work of those who succeed on their own merit.

Universities are independent and autonomous bodies responsible for decisions such as admissions, diversity of provision, course content, teaching and assessment. As such, they are responsible for designing and implementing their own policies and approaches to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and for taking steps to detect and prevent any form of academic misconduct by students, including the misuse of AI, as set out in the Office for Students’ (OfS) regulatory framework.

The experience and expertise of the sector is contributing to the department’s evidence base for how generative AI is used in education. In January 2024, the department published research entitled ‘Generative AI in education: Educator and expert views’ containing insights from interviews with teachers and experts in HE and the education technology industry. The full research paper is attached and also available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/65b8cd41b5cb6e000d8bb74e/DfE_GenAI_in_education_-_Educator_and_expert_views_report.pdf.

The OfS set out its approach to the use of AI in HE in a recent blog post entitled ‘Embracing innovation in higher education: our approach to artificial intelligence’. The full blog post is available here: https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/news-blog-and-events/blog/embracing-innovation-in-higher-education-our-approach-to-artificial-intelligence/.

The department does not have evidence to suggest that university students are using self-declaration of neurodiversity to cheat or gain unneeded leniency in exams or assessments.

Universities provide support for neurodiverse students to ensure they have equal opportunities to succeed. This includes reasonable adjustments such as extra time in exams or alternative assessment methods.

To receive this type of support, students typically need to provide evidence of their neurodivergence and how it would impair their ability to complete certain activities. This process helps ensure that only those who genuinely need support receive it.

Universities are increasingly aware of the need to support neurodiverse students appropriately. This includes training staff to recognise and support students with neurodiverse conditions. The focus is on providing fair and necessary support to students who need it.

The department does not directly influence how universities assess a student's work. Universities have autonomy over their assessment methods and academic standards.

The Office for Students (OfS), established under the Higher Education and Research Act 2017, regulates higher education providers in England. It ensures that universities meet certain standards for teaching quality, student outcomes and financial sustainability. While the OfS sets the regulatory framework, universities retain the freedom to design and implement their own assessment methods.

The OfS requires universities to meet certain standards for accessibility and support for disabled students. This includes making reasonable adjustments in assessments to ensure that disabled students are not disadvantaged. These adjustments can include alternative formats for exams, extended deadlines, and other accommodations tailored to individual needs.

While universities retain autonomy over their specific assessment methods, they must comply with these broader regulatory requirements to ensure fair and equitable treatment of disabled students. This is also supported by guidance provided as part of the Disabled Student Commitment scheme launched by the Disabled Students' Commission.

The responsibility to monitor or record the numbers of boats and boaters on canals and waterways in England and Wales rests with navigation authorities as they manage and administer boat registration and licensing regimes for the use of their waterways. The two largest navigation authorities are the Canal and River Trust and Environment Agency (EA). The Government has regular engagement with both authorities.

The Trust recorded 33,080 registered and unregistered boats on its waterways in its 2025 national boat survey. The Trust’s boat licensing requirements do not include the number of people per boat or whether they sleep on board. The EA records that there are just over 20,000 registered and unregistered boats on its waterways. It also does not collect information on the number of people who use the boats, including as their primary residence for sleeping purposes.

The condition of the canal and waterway infrastructure is the responsibility of the navigation authorities that own them. The two largest authorities are the Canal and River Trust with 2,000 miles of waterways, and the Environment Agency (EA) with 630 miles of river navigations. The Government provides an annual grant of £52.6 million to the Trust to support its infrastructure programme, and this financial year is providing grant-in-aid of £25 million to the EA to support its navigations.

As of 31 March 2025 (latest published figures), the Trust had 81.25% of its towpaths in conditions fair to very good (target not less than 50%), 13.77% of principal assets in conditions poor to bad (target not more than 25%), and 0.58% of flood management assets (principal culverts and embankments) in conditions poor to bad (target not more than 7%). These targets form the conditional element of the annual government grant. Trust assets are subject to a regular inspection regime by accredited inspectors. Defra officials meet the Trust’s senior management team formally three times a year to discuss the Trust’s work and use of the grant funding.

EA-owned and maintained navigation assets are also inspected by accredited inspectors as part of a risk based scheduled programme. Where identified, maintenance repairs on assets below the required condition are prioritised and allocated funding according to factors including sustaining navigation, public safety, and flood risk in the event of failure.

Communications between boaters and the Trust are a matter for both parties. The Trust recognises the importance of communications with boaters, conducts an annual boater survey, and has published its ‘Better Boating Plan’ that sets out areas of boaters’ concerns and actions being taken to address them. The recommendations in the Independent Commission on Boat Licensing’s report published last November included improved communications with the boating community. The Trust has accepted all the recommendations and is now considering how best to implement them.

Our inland waterways are important for the natural environment by providing green corridors along which biodiversity can flourish. They also directly contribute to the growth of local economies, through domestic tourism and facilitating active transport links. They have a wider positive benefit for our economy and culture through providing many public benefits, including health and wellbeing, leisure and recreation uses, and industrial heritage attractions.

Defra officials meet regularly with the Trust to discuss a range of issues. The Trust publishes its annual Impact Report on its contribution to the economy, environment, and wildlife. The Environment Agency has not undertaken specific quantitative assessments of the contribution its waterways make to the economy, environment, and wildlife; however, its previous navigation plans acknowledge the benefits they bring.

Since 2016, the Environment Agency has invested £125 million of government funding on a major upgrade of the engineered defences through York, including walls and flood gates and improvements to the Foss Barrier and pumping station. The defences are designed to protect properties from a flood with a 1% probability of happening in any given year, allowing for the effects of climate change until 2039. Further climate change predictions indicate upper catchment flood alleviation measures will be required to offer York the same standard of protection past 2039.

The Road Vehicles Lighting Regulations 1989 specify that cycles, must be fitted with a red rear reflector and amber pedal reflectors. The Highway Code, which incorporates the requirements of these Regulations, clarifies in Rule 60 that cycles must have white front and red rear lights lit when being ridden at night. These requirements apply to all cycles, as well as e-cycles which comply with the Electrically Assisted Pedal Cycle Regulations 1983, and are thereby applicable to all cyclists, including delivery riders.

The Railways Bill will set out Great British Railway's statutory functions, as the directing mind for the railway. In general terms Great British Railways (GBR) will manage cross-network planning and operations for current and future customer needs. With oversight by the Secretary of State and where necessary Scottish Ministers, GBR will make informed trade-offs between different uses of the railway, which is as crucial for the efficiency of freight operations as it is for passenger services.

Passengers and taxpayers expect a consistent service across the rail network, and the majority support the move to a publicly owned-rail network, as outlined in a YouGov survey from 2024.

Future rail infrastructure investment will be considered as part of the current Spending Review, which will be concluded in June 2025.

South Western Railway Sunday services between Yeovil and London Waterloo have been challenging. Over the past 13 rail periods, 79.04% of services have departed within three minutes of their advertised departure time, with 96.73% departing within fifteen minutes. I am meeting South Western Railway on performance issues, as is being done with all Operators, later this month.

There are currently no plans to review the service between London and Yeovil. South-Western Railway is in continued contact with the Department regarding its service provision, including on the West of England line on which Yeovil sits. When reviewing services, the Department needs to assess business cases and balance demand with value for the taxpayer in its considerations.