Non-Consensual Sexually Explicit Images and Videos (Offences) Bill [HL]

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 13th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, I join in congratulating the noble Baroness, Lady Owen, on introducing this much-needed Bill updating the voyeurism laws as well as the patchwork of laws in line with the huge advances in this digital and social media age. I have had a long-standing interest in the deepfake threat and crisis from the days when I was a member of the Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence in the UK, chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Clement- Jones, way back in 2017. In chapter 8 of our report, we addressed the necessary measures to mitigate the risks of AI, but few of us contemplated the dramatic impact that Al would have on our daily lives—but also the huge threats of the violation of privacy and the psychological impact on individuals, particularly women, who have been subjected to deepfake sexual abuse, causing horrendous anxiety and trauma.

What I feel is imperative is the need to raise far more public awareness of deepfakes and improve prevention. Legislation is not enough; we also need to promote the development and use of advanced technologies to detect and prevent deepfakes and encourage much more co-operation between tech companies as well as policymakers to proactively address misuse. A purely technical solution to identify and label deepfake content is insufficient.

Certainly, social media platforms, not just adult content sites, have been financially incentivised to allow high-traffic content, including harmful deepfakes, because it drives advertising revenue. In this regard, the Bill goes a long way to impose severe penalties for failing to adopt robust technology solutions. Just as banks provide support for victims of scams, so too should similar assistance be extended to individuals harmed by deepfake abuse.

Finally, the proliferation of deepfake sexual abuse highlights the failure of digital identity verification. Generative Al can easily bypass facial recognition and centralised government ID systems. A more robust approach is needed, focusing on device fingerprinting and behavioural fingerprinting to blacklist users creating harmful content. These techniques will ensure that, even if such individuals attempt to reappear under new accounts or identities, they will remain blocked from platforms.

I wholeheartedly support this Bill and entirely agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Owen, that the legislation needs to be future-proof.

Nuptial Agreements

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

Tuesday 25th April 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Bellamy (Con)]

My Lords, it is not a straight- forward issue; even the Law Commission’s report of 2014 made it clear that there had to be quite a number of exceptions in relation to financial need before one could legislate. As I say, the Government prefer to proceed on a broad front rather than deal with this issue specifically.

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, I have practised as a divorce lawyer in South Africa, where the prenuptial agreement is respected, and it should not be seen purely as a protection for high net worth individuals. Why is there so much resistance to respecting and introducing a prenuptial agreement?

[Lord Bellamy (Con)]

My Lords, the Government have confidence in the courts to apply the general law, which is that prenups should in general be respected unless it is unfair to do so. That is not far off what the Law Commission recommended in 2014.

Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

Saturday 10th September 2022 Lords Chamber

[Lord Young of Norwood Green (Lab)]

My Lords, I too welcome the opportunity to pay tribute to Her Majesty. My first memory is from when I was about five years old. There was no television in our house but a radio, and I can remember—probably on the Home Service, because I think there was nothing else—that there was silence and, every now and then, a rather sombre message: “The King has died”. My next memory of the Queen is of the coronation in 1953. I remember standing there with my elder sister, waving our flags; it was a great occasion. In my radical youth I was probably in favour of abolition, but as I got a bit older and thought about the alternatives, I abandoned that stance.

I met her twice. On one occasion I asked the equerry whether it would be okay to talk to her about apprenticeships and training. He said yes, of course it would. I would not go so far as to say that I was pleasantly surprised, but she was enthusiastic and understood the importance of training her staff. That was a good example of her attitude and approach.

I was a member of the Armed Forces pay review group, and we were returning from a visit to Iraq. For some reason the Queen’s plane was available and we were on it. We were being given first-class service by the steward, who was carrying his tray of canapés and delightful drinks. I asked him, “What’s it like when Her Majesty’s on board?” He said, “It is a bit tricky when six corgis are running up and down the gangway”. That struck me as an interesting situation.

I was employed in the GPO as a telecoms engineer—noble Lords may wonder what the connection is—and my boss at the time was the Postmaster-General, Tony Benn. He got it into his head that it would be a really good idea if he came up with a new stamp design that did not include the Queen’s head. Fortunately, the Queen had to approve every new issue of stamps, and I think I can say that when he met the Queen, she certainly was not amused—so that one did not get through.

I was struck by an article in the Times yesterday by Gerard Baker, a rather tough American writer. He concluded it by saying that we have lost a monarch but the world has lost a Queen, which I thought was a very nice tribute.

King Charles has a really hard act to follow, but I think we all agree that yesterday he made a very good start in both what he said and the way he said it. I have not always agreed with everything that King Charles has enthused about, shall we say, but one thing that gains my admiration—there is more than one—is the Prince’s Trust, which does such good work in getting young people into employment. I wish him every success for the future. Given the start he made yesterday, I am sure he will live up to that challenge.

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, like the noble Baroness, Lady Seccombe, I had the privilege of serving as an extra Lord in Waiting to Her late Majesty the Queen, since 1997, with particular responsibility for meeting and greeting Heads of State from Africa. I was also in South Africa in 1995 at the time of Her Majesty the Queen’s state visit at the invitation of President Nelson Mandela. She enjoyed a warm friendship with Nelson Mandela. Amusingly, they were on first name terms with each other from the time they first met.

She got the nickname in South Africa of “Motlalepula”, which means the African queen rainmaker, because her visit coincided with a long drought in Natal: literally the day that she arrived, the heavens opened and they had wonderful rainfall. She had fond memories of South Africa, as mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Alton of Liverpool. I was fortunate enough to have had a very close relationship with Nelson Mandela, otherwise known as Madiba, who held Her Majesty as well as Princess Diana in the highest esteem. Both Her Majesty and Madiba shared the same sense of duty, and both had a wicked sense of humour.

My last memory of Her late Majesty was that she made everyone feel at ease. When I first met her, I had an acute stutter and was at a loss for words as to how to greet her, but she immediately made me feel at ease. Her tireless devotion to others for 70 years, dealing with state and personal difficulties with calmness, dignity and diligence until her last day, was remarkable.

The noble Lord, Lord Dobbs, said yesterday that Her Majesty placed duty first, second and third; I totally agree. She was the glue that kept us all together, and she was the most remarkable example of soft power. The noble Lord, Lord Forsyth, rightly said yesterday that she never put a foot wrong. It was remarkable how well briefed she was on every subject, as was her amazing memory for events gone by. Quite apart from her remarkable work as a monarch, as many noble Lords have mentioned, she had the distinction of being the founder and head of the modern Commonwealth, where she commanded enormous respect from all over the world. She was the most remarkable role model.

Our thoughts and prayers at this time go out to the members of the Royal Family. God save the King.

[Lord Popat (Con)]

My Lords, there are very rare moments in life when the passing of one person touches so many hearts and brings the entire world together. The passing of Her Majesty the Queen is one such moment. For me, it is a difficult task to add to the eloquent tributes that have gone before me and those that will come after. I am humbled to have an opportunity to commemorate Her late Majesty’s excellent and unrivalled record of decades of dutiful, loyal and noble service.

I was privileged to serve in Her Majesty’s Royal Household as a Lord in Waiting from 2013 to 2016. It was and remains the greatest honour of my life. I could not believe that a refugee from Uganda such as I would be asked to join the Royal Household. The invitation reflected the inclusivity and integrity of her great country. In that role of Lord in Waiting, I represented Her Majesty during the repatriation of President Sata’s body to Zambia, alongside the Countess of Wessex, and attended his funeral. What I did was only a fraction of the work the Queen did day in, day out, and I got a slight insight into the pressure of the job. I was also honoured to receive a number of Heads of State on her behalf. The welcome she gave and the humility she showed to those Heads of State are to be admired.

The 21,000 engagements that Her Majesty undertook are testament to her sheer dedication to public service. She must have met thousands and thousands of people, but I will never forget the moment I met her, when she demonstrated the unique ability to make you feel special. She took a keen interest in we Ugandan Asians who emigrated to this country in the 1970s, most of whom were already her subjects.

I will forever remain grateful that I got the opportunity to thank her for all that she did for Ugandan Asians. At a time just before the expulsion, Her Majesty articulated the highest level of diplomacy when responding to Idi Amin’s invitation to visit Uganda in 1972. Despite knowing his dictatorship, she deliberately signed her letter to Amin from “Your good friend, Elizabeth R.” She did so because she knew that British lives could be at risk if Amin thought he was being snubbed. Had it not been for her conscious efforts, thousands like me would not be here today.

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

Lords Hansard - part one & Committee stage
Monday 8th November 2021 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sandhurst (Con)]

My Lords, I support these amendments. I do so as a resident and ratepayer of the London Borough of Wandsworth; I declare that interest. I was encouraged to speak in this debate and support these amendments by the Conservative leader of that borough. He believes that they are desirable and will be beneficial to the residents of his borough, and he will be answerable to his electorate in due course.

In short, these amendments will, subject to the Secretary of State’s approval, enable but not oblige a borough to take up powers over speeding restrictions and traffic light contraventions. The aim is very simple: to stop people speeding. Because the boroughs anticipate that taking over the management of speed enforcement will create something of a virtuous circle, they will be more energetic about it than the police are. They will enforce speed limits because they have a financial stake in it directly and, because they enforce it and recover the costs, they will have to recycle the money they get in highway improvements, traffic calming and road safety generally.

What is there not to like about that? It will benefit residents and road users. Better enforcement will bring down speeds on residential roads. Lower speeds reduce the level of pollution and particulates. Better enforcement by boroughs will make residential roads safer for pedestrians and cyclists. It is a commonplace that an accident at 30 mph can kill; a pedestrian hit at 20 mph or less has a much more viable chance of survival without even serious injury. So, if these amendments are accepted, there will be immediate health and safety benefit to residents in any borough that chooses to adopt them.

Giving boroughs control over speeding and traffic lights is simply a no-brainer. I stress that boroughs will not be compelled to adopt these powers; it will be for each borough to do so when the time is ripe and it is in a position to carry them out. In summary, these amendments will bring great benefit to the citizens of London.

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, I am afraid that I take a converse view on this. London has a massive problem with increasing traffic congestion, and I do not believe that reducing the speed limit to 30 mph is going to bring the death rate down to zero. On the converse, one of the biggest problems in London is pedestrians crossing the road more transfixed on their mobile telephones than on watching oncoming traffic. I am not opposing this amendment; I am just saying that reducing the speed limit will not necessarily bring the death rate down to zero.

[Baroness Hamwee (LD)]

My Lords, I do not think that my noble friend is proposing to reduce the speed limit. It is about enforcement of whatever the speed limit is.

Divorce (Financial Provision) Bill [HL]

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

Friday 21st November 2014 Lords Chamber

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, I add my support for prenuptial agreements. I say that in the context that I trained as a Roman-Dutch lawyer, under which law a prenup is recognised. In an era when we have one of the highest divorce rates ever, certainly this is the time to simplify this important part of divorce law.

I say a prenup rather than a post-nup because obviously a prenup is more certain and there is far less scope for negotiation than with a post-nuptial agreement. But a prenup makes the likelihood of successful mediation far more likely than is the case now.

A common theme of the Bill has been to provide more certainty. Ideally, we want a clean break for those going through the unfortunate process of getting divorced. Apart from the huge cost of lengthy divorces, not much has been mentioned today about the huge stress that this has on children from this prolonged and tortuous process. The noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox, mentioned the important fact that, without this protection, those who have gone through traumatic divorces are far less likely to want to get remarried. I am sure that she will also have mentioned that 16 million people in Britain are over the age of 65. That is another reason why this clause should be promoted.

[Lord Cormack (Con)]

My Lords, I was not intending to speak but I have one or two points to make. When my noble friend talked about a cottage industry I thought that was probably scaling things down a little; it is a mansion industry rather than a cottage industry. I accept the total impeccable logic of the case advanced by the noble Baroness, Lady Deech. She is talking about an unfortunate necessity. Only this week I met a young girl in her 20s. I have known her since she was born. She married with great hope less than 18 months ago and the marriage is foundering now. Of course, I accept all that, but am I alone in your Lordships’ House in expressing infinite regret that we are where we are?

Divorce (Financial Provision) Bill [HL]

Lord St John of Bletso Excerpts

Friday 27th June 2014 Lords Chamber

[Lord St John of Bletso (CB)]

My Lords, I join in warmly welcoming my noble friend’s Bill, which addresses the urgent need for more certainty in the law pertaining to financial orders on divorce and dissolution, which is in a state of constant development. It is also an opportune time for my noble friend to introduce this Bill, following the Law Commission’s marital agreement proposals which, as has been mentioned, were set out in the draft nuptial agreements Bill.

I speak from my experience of being a practising divorce lawyer in South Africa, under Roman Dutch Law, which respects binding prenuptial agreements, and where there is far more certainty in the determination of financial settlements on divorce. I also have a personal strong interest in this Bill as I sadly endured a long and very painful recent divorce, which was both costly and hugely stressful for all concerned, particularly my children. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern, was right to highlight the damage done to children by lengthy divorces.

Whatever may be the objections of the church to prenuptial and post-nuptial agreements, there is no evidence that marriage breakdown is encouraged by the drawing up of these agreements. It is well known that divorce among older couples is on the increase, with recent statistics showing that the highest percentage of divorces occur among couples aged between 40 and 45. There is increasing need for certainty in cases of bequests and family trusts, particularly with couples who have remarried and who want to make sure that they retain their inheritance. For those who have had a bad divorce experience—I note the comments of the noble Baroness, Lady Wilcox—and are somewhat reluctant to commit to another marriage, prenuptial and post-nuptial agreements provide far more certainty and comfort. I agree with my noble and learned friend Lord Scott that these agreements should be in writing. In this regard, I wholeheartedly support Clause 3 of the Bill.

It is a staggering statistic that there are more than 119,000 divorces in England and Wales annually, with financial orders made by the court in about a third of those. As several noble Lords have mentioned, the removal of legal aid has led to a steep rise in self-representation, overloading the divorce courts and causing even lengthier delays. Recent tax changes have also added to the difficulties of couples whose main asset is the family home. Until this year, married couples, or those in civil partnerships, qualified for tax relief on capital gains from the sale of their principal private residence for three years after separation. However, in the Autumn Statement, the Chancellor changed this to just 18 months. This has put more pressure on financial settlements, given the need to conclude the sale of the family home within a year and a half of one party leaving it.

I do not want to repeat the many cogent arguments that have been put forward in support of the Bill. There is no denying that, when it comes to building wealth or avoiding poverty, a stable marriage is in many cases the most important asset. However, the recent Law Commission report highlighted:

“Although the law is largely well understood by family lawyers, it is inaccessible to the general public and there is evidence that the courts in different areas of the country do not always apply the law consistently”.

Among its many benefits, the Bill, if enacted, would certainly provide better opportunities for mediation, less necessity to go to court, far less stress for divorcing couples, particularly for their children, and a massive saving in costs. In this regard, I wholeheartedly support it and hope that it is given a fair hearing in both this House and the other place.