Public Office (Accountability) Bill

Lord Sahota Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 1st September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, it is a real honour to follow the noble Lord, Lord Carlile. What I want to say has mostly been said but, still, I shall continue. I support the Bill because it addresses one of the most important principles in public life: when a state is responsible for serving the public, it must also be accountable to the public.

The lessons of Hillsborough are painful and profound. When things went wrong, institutions closed rank, information was withheld, responsibility was deflected, and bereaved families were left fighting for the truth. That is why I particularly welcome the Bill’s duty of candour. Public authorities and public officials should have nowhere to hide. They should be required to act with transparency, frankness and honesty, and to assist inquiries and investigations in finding the truth.

The Bill provides criminal sanction for serious breaches, which I wholeheartedly support as well. This matters because accountability cannot simply mean blaming an institution after the event. There must be a responsibility for the individual who makes decisions or who withholds information.

In my public life over the last 30 years, I have seen some incompetent people in charge of important decision-making where their first instinct is to protect themselves, hiding behind institutions and their departments. Most say that they are acting in the best public interest. I welcome that the Bill also challenges that culture.

Of course, we must be careful when forming criminal law. The threshold must be high and nobody should face imprisonment merely for making an honest mistake. However, when there is serious wrongdoing, dishonesty or deliberate failure to uphold fundamental responsibilities, there must be consequences.

I also strongly welcome the principle of parity of representation. This is about fairness. A bereaved family should not have to face a public authority equipped with lawyers and resources while the family struggles to obtain equivalent representation. The ordinary citizen, the little man or woman, must have a genuine opportunity to challenge the machinery of the state.

The Post Office Horizon scandal demonstrated why the Bill is so urgently needed. Thousands of postmasters were wrongly accused of stealing money from the Post Office, while serious problems with the computer system were known about. Yet those postmasters were left to carry the blame.

Windrush is another example. The independent review found that this was not simply bureaucratic bad luck but a profound institutional failure. The hostile environment in which this policy developed had devastating consequences for hundreds of law-abiding citizens—British citizens—many of whom had lived here since childhood. Some lost their job and their livelihood, and, in some cases, were wrongly removed from this country. What happened to them was reprehensible. I wish there had been such a law then to ensure that those responsible, including the Home Office of the day, could properly be held to account.

Then there was the Covid-19 pandemic and the controversy surrounding public procurement, including the so-called VIP lane. Billions of pounds of public money were committed in extraordinary circumstances, and serious questions have subsequently been raised about value for money, transparency and accountability. I hope this Government will pursue every opportunity to recover public money where it was improperly spent.

I hope the Bill will ensure that the power of the state is matched by an equal obligation to be accountable to the people it serves, rather than leaving families begging for information and truth. For those reasons, I strongly support the Bill and look forward to helping strengthen it as it proceeds through this House.

King’s Speech

Lord Sahota Excerpts

Monday 18th May 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, I will focus my remarks on the proposed changes to settlement rights for overseas workers. I recognise the need to balance compassion with control and fairness with sustainability. However, I must express my deep concern regarding the proposal to extend the qualifying period for indefinite leave to remain for overseas workers from five to 10 years or even more, as the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, said.

These workers came here in good faith and at our invitation at a time when our nation faced acute shortages—and those shortages have not disappeared. They have worked tirelessly to support our elderly and vulnerable citizens, often in demanding and underappreciated roles. In doing so, they have become an integral part of our communities; they are no longer strangers but our neighbours, colleagues and friends. Their children attend our schools, they contribute to our local economies and they participate fully in community life. They have begun to build their futures here, with the understanding, based on existing policy, that after five years of lawful residence and service they would be eligible to settle here permanently. An accessible path to settlement is crucial to integration. Forcing people into a state of enduring temporariness and precariousness—not fully included in this society for over a decade—is a disaster for integration.

We must also acknowledge the financial and personal sacrifices that many of these workers have made. Many still carry substantial debts as a result. For some, once in this country, their exploitation and misery do not end there. Some British employers are aware of their vulnerability and abuse the control and power of sponsorship; such is the unacceptable face of exploitation and modern slavery in our country. If they complain about their rights being violated and report their plight to the authorities, they fear being placed on the first plane back home to their country of origin.

I understand the Government’s perspective that immigration must be brought down. I also understand how some of our citizens feel about higher levels of immigration. However, those levels have fallen significantly in recent times. Fairness and integrity have long been the hallmarks of our national character. Let us ensure that these values are reflected in our decision-making. I urge the Government to reconsider this proposal, to uphold their commitment to advancing integration and protecting workers from abuse and to maintain the original pathway to settlement for those who have already given so much in service to our society.

Asylum Seekers: Legal Aid

Lord Sahota Excerpts

Thursday 23rd January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

My Lords, we are working within the sector to try to build up the support for people able to provide support for those making potential appeals. We are working with and funding the Law Society to enable it to fund the accreditation of suitably qualified people to enable this work to be undertaken. We are increasing the base of lawyers and others who can take on this work.

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, what provisions are in place when an asylum seeker is refused their initial asylum claim and NASS, the National Asylum Support Service, records only their refusal decision and not that the asylum seeker has submitted their appeal, with their accommodation and subsistence allowance therefore not reinstated?

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for giving me notice of his question and I will write to him. I hear similar questions in my other private life, and I will ensure that a proper answer is provided to my noble friend’s question.

Miscarriages of Justice

Lord Sahota Excerpts

Wednesday 14th June 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bellamy (Con)]

My Lords, with respect, the Government do not entirely agree with the analysis of the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, that there is a connection between miscarriages of justices and delays in the court system. The Government are doing their very best to reduce those delays, which no one wants. They are partly caused by the longer-term overhang of Covid and are particularly and more recently caused by the barristers’ strike. The Government are doing their very best to reduce those backlogs by introducing further judges and adding resources wherever they can.

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, I recently read the Lammy review. It states that 41% of black defendants who pleaded not guilty opted for their cases to be heard

“in Crown Courts … compared to 31% of white defendants. This means they lose the possibility of reduced sentences and it raises questions about trust in the system”.

It also states that

“for every 100 white women”

given a custodial sentence for drug offences, “227 black women” were given a custodial sentence for the same offence. Is that acceptable to the Government?

[Lord Bellamy (Con)]

Discrimination in the criminal justice system is not acceptable to the Government. The Government are conscious that there are concerns about the way that ethnic minority persons are treated within the system and are determined to ensure that those problems are ameliorated and addressed in the longer run.

Prisons: Chaplaincy Service

Lord Sahota Excerpts

Tuesday 10th January 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bellamy (Con)]

My Lords, to the best of my knowledge, there are approximately 1,200 prison chaplains overall and approximately 20 chaplains of the Sikh faith. I do not have other figures in front of me. Sikhs make up less than 1% of the prison population, which is extremely admirable, and the number of Sikh chaplains in particular is well out of proportion to the number of Sikhs who are unfortunately in prison.

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, when deciding on the policy of the Prison and Probation Service with regards to its pastoral service, the views of all faiths should be taken into account. I was surprised to learn from my friend, the noble Lord, Lord Singh of Wimbledon, that this is sometimes not the case. I sincerely hope that the Government take these views into account and look into this matter urgently.

[Baroness Burt of Solihull (LD)]

My Lords—