(2 weeks, 4 days ago)
Grand CommitteeMy Lords, I rise with a profound sense of responsibility because the issue before us goes to the very heart of our constitutional settlement: the integrity of our democracy. At the moment there is a growing and deeply troubling perception that British democracy is simply on sale to the highest bidder. That perception alone should alarm us all. We are witnessing donations whose true origins are unclear and that are rooted through opaque structures, sometimes linked to foreign interests and are too often beyond the effective scrutiny of the regulator. This is not a theoretical concern; it is a present and pressing danger. The principle is simple: decisions about the future of the United Kingdom should be made by the British people, not shaped by unknown donors, overseas interests or hidden financial powers.
Democracy is about equality of voice, not inequality of wealth. The Committee on Standards in Public Life has recommended a cap of £10,000 on donations to political parties. Such a cap would not stifle political participation; it would protect it. It would ensure that political parties are funded by broad public support rather than a narrow group of wealthy benefactors.
The integrity of our democracy is at stake. The United Kingdom is respected around the world as a beacon of democratic governance, often described, rightly or wrongly, as the mother of all democracies. That reputation has been earned over the centuries through reform, restraint and a shared commitment to fairness and accountability. It must not be squandered now. Democracy cannot be treated as a commodity traded to the highest bidder. It is a trust handed down to us and held on behalf of future generations. Safeguarding requires courage, transparency and a willingness to confront uncomfortable truths. This House has a duty to act. If we fail to strengthen our law on political donations, we risk allowing money to speak louder than the citizen. We cannot and must not take that risk.
(2 weeks, 5 days ago)
Lords ChamberNew measures were introduced in the Planning and Infrastructure Act to make sure that we deal effectively with nutrient neutrality. We have had to do this without causing the impact on housebuilding that had been done under the previous Government. We have taken the steps needed. We have the nature restoration fund. Developers can work as part of this to make sure that they are able to deliver the homes and meet the needs of the environment at the same time.
My Lords, in order to deliver these homes, local authorities need to co-operate with the Government, particularly in preparing local plans, allocating land, speeding up planning decisions, working with developers and communities, and so on. Are local authorities co-operating with the Government to deliver these 1.5 million homes in this Parliament?
As I stated, I remind my noble friend that we see our partnership with local authorities as critical to delivering the housing numbers we need. The Planning and Infrastructure Act that we passed last year will accelerate housebuilding while preserving important environmental protections, making sure that we get the consenting process sped up and a more strategic approach to nature recovery, and improving certainty in the decision-making and planning system. We have supported local authority planning capacity with the funding and training that are needed. We are working together with our partners in local authorities to make sure that we get this moving as quickly as possible.
(1 month ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I congratulate the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Coventry on her moving and illuminating maiden speech.
I rise with a profound sense of solemnity and responsibility. Holocaust Memorial Day is not merely a day of remembrance but a day of moral reckoning—one that calls on us all year after year to confront the darkest capacities of humanity and reaffirm our shared commitment to ensuring that such horrors are never repeated.
The Holocaust was a heinous crime—an atrocity of the worst kind in human history. Six million Jewish men, women and children were systematically murdered, alongside millions of others, including Roma, disabled people, political dissidents, and members of the LGBT community. This was not an accident of war but a deliberate and industrialised attempt to eradicate an entire people. We must continue to remind the world that such inhumanity to humanity must never be allowed to happen again.
We also remember that many of those responsible were ultimately brought to justice. That matters. Accountability matters. It reaffirms our fundamental principle that no state, no Government and no individual are beyond moral or legal judgment.
However, Holocaust Memorial Day also invites us to reflect broadly on the lessons of history. It asks us not only to remember one atrocity but to recognise and remember others committed across different times, different continents and different cultures, so that memory itself may serve as a safeguard against repetition. In that spirit, we must acknowledge other grave injustices that occurred that scar our collective past.
One such example is the Amritsar massacre of 13 April 1919, when hundreds of unarmed men, women and children were brutally killed at Jallianwala Bagh. They had gathered there peacefully, yet they were met with indiscriminate and lethal force. This was a profound moral failure and a tragedy that continues to resonate, particularly for British Indians and the wider Commonwealth. There have been other atrocities across the world as well, such as Rwanda, Srebrenica, Cambodia, My Lai and many more. Each reminds us that the promise of “never again” must be renewed continually, not spoken once and then just forgotten.
Remembrance without reflection is hollow. Reflection without responsibility is incomplete. Acknowledging historical wrongs does not diminish a nation. Rather, it strengthens its moral standing and demonstrates the courage to confront uncomfortable truths. In reflecting on the lessons of the Holocaust, we are also invited to look with honesty and humility at our history.
Amritsar remains a source of deep sadness, particularly for those whose families were directly affected. In that context, I respectfully ask my noble friend the Minister whether His Majesty’s Government have any plan to offer a formal apology for the Amritsar massacre, in recognition of the hundreds of innocent men, women and children who were mowed down on that tragic day. Such an apology would not undo the past, but it would carry a profound symbolic weight and reaffirm our enduring commitment to justice, humanity and historical truth.
(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberI very much agree. I have seen on the front line how cuts to local government funding have affected so much the provision of social activities, culture and leisure in our communities. It is very important that local government has the ability to make provision for local communities in those areas. What happened was that the harder it was for a local council to raise funds, the more they seemed to be penalised through the system. The more deprived a community was, the less likely they were to have the headroom to deliver the kinds of services the noble Earl speaks about. We need to change that, and we are working on reversing that.
My Lords, what assessment have the Government made of the reasons so many local authorities are failing to meet their housing delivery targets? What steps are being taken to support them in doing so?
The first thing we did was restore the mandatory housing targets because, first, it did not make any sense to us. We wanted to deliver an overall target across the country but we were not saying what part in that each local authority played. Secondly, we know there are a lot of pressures facing local planning authorities. We have invested £46 million in this year’s funding to strengthen the capacity and capability to deliver planning reform to enable local authorities to meet their housing targets. We have made a commitment to recruit 300 additional planners, alongside wider planning policy changes—we will be discussing these later this afternoon—and legislative changes. That will help us deliver the housing and economic growth our country desperately needs.
(4 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberI am very happy to take back whether we need some more communication on this. We have been very clear that we take a brownfield-first approach, but we know that brownfield alone will not be enough to deliver the country’s needs. That is why we have asked all local authorities that cannot meet their needs to review green belt and to identify opportunities. We expect them to prioritise the development of brownfield and the low-quality grey-belt land that the noble Baroness referred to. High-performing green-belt land and land safeguarded for environmental reasons will still be protected. The green-belt reforms support a more strategic and targeted approach to green belt. However, as I said, we are looking at brownfield first. Then, we expect local authorities to look at grey belt. I will take back to the department whether we need to communicate any further on that issue.
My Lords, before I ask the question, I wish all noble Lords a happy Diwali.
What role do local authorities play in achieving the 1.5 million homes target, and how are they supported?
(5 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberI thank the noble Lord for those comments. Of course, he has great expertise in this area, which I recognise and welcome. I think there are a number of things being done in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to address that imbalance. I think the resources that we are putting into the planning system will help with that. A £46 million package is a significant investment. We need to upskill our local planners to make sure they are able to implement reforms and drive the scale of growth that we want to see. I am not saying we will offset that balance completely, but I am sure that speeding up the planning process and providing planners with much more delegated authority to deal with application themselves will help.
My Lords, one of the problems with developing houses is developers land banking. Do the Government have a policy or plan to stop developers banking land and building on it years and years later?
There are proposals that mean that, at the time that a planning application is delivered, local authorities can specify when that application needs to be built out. So we are taking steps to ensure that, once an application has received approval, it is built out as quickly as possible. It is in no one’s interest for vast areas of land that can be built on not to be built on, so we will make sure that we deliver as much as possible. The new homes accelerator has already moved this on a considerable way.
(11 months ago)
Lords ChamberI thank the noble Lord for his question. I think the commissioners are referring to the fact that each time a report is due, the Government can consider whether it is time to take the commissioners’ support out. The commissioners were trying to indicate that they do not feel that the council is ready for their support to be withdrawn at this stage.
The report highlights the progress made by the council so far. It notes the leadership of Councillor Cotton and Joanne Roney, and the hard work of many diligent members of staff in the council. In the circumstance we find ourselves in with Birmingham, that can often be overlooked. Many of the staff there are working tirelessly to make sure that the council delivers for its residents.
The report also sets out that the journey to recovery and financial stability is far from over, as the noble Lord says, and has been heavily dependent on the input, guidance and advice of the commissioner team so far. The indication in the line that the noble Lord quoted is that the council continues to need that commissioner support. We agree with that as a Government, and we will continue to support the leader and his team in Birmingham directly and through the commissioners to move the council on from the historical issues with a fair resolution. The way to do this is to continue on the journey that the council is on and make sure that they all stabilise the council so that it will be able to deliver for its residents long into the future.
My Lords, I declare that I am a member of Unite the Union. I urge my fellow brothers and sisters to keep on talking.
Under the previous Government, many councils of all colours went bankrupt, including Birmingham Council. The root cause of all this was the historical underfunding by the previous Government, as the noble Lord has pointed out, for the past 14 years. Is the historical underfunding of Birmingham Council still the problem there?
I thank my noble friend for his question. Like many noble Lords in this House, he has direct experience of leading a council, so he has felt the pain of funding cuts, as have all of us who have been in that position. We have made some changes to the local government funding formula this year to make sure that funding goes where it is needed most, instead of following a historical pattern of allocations. We will make further changes to that. As noble Lords will be aware, we are going into the spending review process now, which is why we could issue only one-year settlements, but we will provide multiyear funding settlements, which will make a difference to the stability for local government funding and make sure that the greater quantum of funding goes to the areas where it is most needed, of which Birmingham is certainly one.
(11 months, 2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I begin by expressing my gratitude to the noble Baroness, Lady Verma, for securing this important debate in your Lordships’ Chamber. I congratulate my noble friends Lord Raval and Lord Rook on their moving and illuminating maiden speeches, which I enjoyed very much.
The UK is now a truly diverse multicultural and multifaith society, with all minority communities fully protected by various pieces of legislation. However, legislation can do only so much. It cannot always change deeply entrenched views, beliefs, attitudes and values.
When immigrants from the Commonwealth began to arrive in the UK after the Second World War, they faced widespread discrimination in their daily lives, whether in housing, employment or public spaces. In the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, this discrimination was, more often than not, overt. For example, in 1970, a pub landlord threw my father out of his premises simply because he did not speak English. Although his rights were protected by law, the prejudice of the time persisted.
However, as time passed, values and attitudes evolved. Today, I believe the UK stands as one of the most tolerant and inclusive societies in the world—yet we must not let our guard down. We need only to look at what happened last summer in Southport, when three young girls were tragically murdered. A rumour spread on social media falsely claiming that a Muslim asylum seeker was responsible. This must never happen again.
Community cohesion is undermined by inequality, poverty, misinformation and barriers to essential services. It is further threatened by low social mobility, a lack of respect for ethnic differences, negative attitudes towards migrants, low levels of local pride, fear of crime, and a lack of trust between different ethnic groups.
Today I will focus on one area: access to consumer credit. It is clear that some minority communities, particularly black African and Caribbean, Bangladeshi and Pakistani communities, face far greater barriers when trying to access consumer credit. These groups often find themselves on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder, experiencing more significant financial exclusion than others. They are more likely to be denied loans for purchasing homes or starting businesses due to their lower levels of savings and assets. Despite accounting for only 10% of fraud victims, they are far less likely to have their money returned. They were disproportionately impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, suffering sharper declines in income and financial stability.
To address these disadvantages, we must first recognise and acknowledge them. Improving community cohesion requires a collective effort from the Government, local authorities, police, fire and rescue services, health and social care providers, and third-sector organisations. They must work towards a common vision that promotes equality and inclusion. This can be achieved only through open dialogue and mutual understanding, social interaction between different cultures and faiths, and stronger engagement between public institutions and diverse communities. Only through genuine integration can we break down barriers and ensure that every individual, regardless of their background, feels a true sense of belonging in our society.
(1 year ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I have been in your Lordships’ House for just over two years and this is the first time I have taken part in a Holocaust Memorial Day debate. It is a humbling experience to listen to all the moving speeches.
As we all know, the word “Holocaust” is most commonly associated with the Nazi genocide of Jews in Europe during the Second World War. It is one of the darkest and most horrific episodes in human history and highlights man’s inhumanity to man. Six million Jews were murdered—not 1 million or 2 million but 6 million. How could it happen? When I watch the grainy black and white footage of the concentration camps, it feels as though it happened yesterday—not in some distant medieval time, not 100 years ago, but yesterday and as if I could almost touch it. How could anyone conceive of the idea that they could eradicate an entire race of millions of people from the face of this earth and not be held accountable by future generations?
Where were the voices of reason, of right-minded men and women in Germany at that time? How could a nation that gave the world great literature, philosophy and classical music descend into such barbarity? It is said that when the news of what was happening in these concentration camps first reached London and Washington, the political establishment refused to believe it, thinking that it was simply not possible. Yet, due to some complex geopolitics, Germany was taken in by this evil, grotesque ideology, led by unscrupulous men, resulting in this mass murder on an industrial scale.
Learning about such horror should remind us all of the dangers of nationalism, xenophobia and the rhetoric of hate. Regardless of our political differences, it is our responsibility to oppose politicians and leaders who prey on people’s fears and promote hate. It is up to us to defend democracy, freedom, life and liberty. Over the centuries, mankind has committed countless horrendous mass murders, massacres and atrocities. Some have faced justice, others have not. The German playwright and anti-Nazi activist Bertolt Brecht wrote:
“When crimes begin to pile up, they become invisible. When sufferings become unendurable, the cries are no longer heard”.
In 1948, the United Nations established the genocide convention, which remains the main international legal instrument for preventing genocides. Yet, tragically, this has not prevented further atrocities being committed. In July 1995, right in the heart of Europe, 8,000 men and boys were murdered in cold blood by Bosnian Serbs in what is known as the Srebrenica massacre. In July 1994, in Rwanda, over a million people were slaughtered. Back in 1995, the Turkish army systematically murdered well over a million Armenians—an event widely regarded as genocide.
In 1968, American troops slaughtered hundreds of unarmed civilians in a village in Vietnam and gang-raped women and girls in what became known as the My Lai massacre. The only man convicted of this crime, William Calley, was later pardoned by President Nixon, and that speaks volumes about our present-day justice system.
In November 1984, after the assassination of the Prime Minister of India, Indira Gandhi, we witnessed the planned massacre of many thousands of innocent Sikh men, women and children in Delhi. Forty years have passed yet justice remains elusive.
In India, at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar on 13 April 1919, during the British Raj, General Reginald Dyer ordered his troops to open fire on an unarmed crowd of over 20,000 people, killing hundreds. The British historian Nigel Collett, in his biography of General Dyer, titled The Butcher of Amritsar, claimed that over 800 men, women and children were mown down in just 10 minutes, with hundreds more dying from their wounds.
I could go on with many more examples, as history is full of such atrocities and massacres. Above all, though, the Holocaust is the worst of them all. It happened.
(1 year, 4 months ago)
Lords ChamberThe noble Lord makes an important point. I will not comment on leaks, to the Sunday Times or anywhere else, but I have been talking extensively with the development industry about skills in that area, not just for traditional methods of construction but to deal with modern methods of construction and the whole range of new skills that we will need to fit properties to make sure that they are net zero. We are looking right across the board at that and working with the construction industry to see what needs to be done to help it develop the level of skills that we know we are going to need.
My Lords, last week, the Government allocated £68 million for 54 councils to build social housing on brownfield sites. Will there be further funding for other councils for similar projects to build houses on brownfield sites?
I thank my noble friend for drawing attention to the brownfield land release fund. The Government’s preference is to use brownfield first; we want to turn neglected sites into new homes. This funding will help clear empty buildings, former car parks and industrial land to make way for homes. We think that the first tranche of funding will enable around 5,200 homes. Further announcements on this will be made at the time of the spending review.