King’s Speech

Lord Walney Excerpts

Monday 18th May 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Walney (CB)]

My Lords, let me begin where the noble Lord, Lord McColl of Dulwich, ended. It has been a huge privilege to share these Benches and this debate with my noble friend Lord Hennessy. I briefly add my own tribute. Understandably, much of the discussion has been about his role as a Member of this House, and as a historian and academic on the constitution. He is also the country’s pre-eminent historian of the British submarine programme and the national deterrent, and we—this nation, the town of Barrow-in-Furness and I personally—owe him a huge debt for the contribution he has made over the years. He will be so deeply missed, and I am humbled to be able to call him a friend.

I welcome the tackling state threats Bill. We all hope that it will deliver a proscription of the IRGC that is every bit as strong as full proscription with a different name. I hope the Minister in his conclusion will say whether the Bill will be fast-tracked, as has been suggested in recent days. It is urgently needed and has been for many years, but the sense of crisis currently, with the conflict in Iran and the explosion of violent antisemitism in our communities, means there can be no excuse for delay.

Can the Minister also explain why it was suggested that neither that Bill nor the announced national security Bill include a commitment to enact the Government’s also much-needed commitment to tackle extremism in the charity sector? This was a welcome announcement on an issue that is also urgent. Surely, the power to strike off charities will require primary legislation. Therefore, if the Government could clarify why there is no mention of that in any of the briefing on the Bills, that would be appreciated.

Furthermore, what is the level of commitment to any measures that may be deemed necessary following the review of the noble Lord, Lord Macdonald, into hate crime and public order? The Government have said that they will publish that review shortly and will enact a number of recommendations from it. It is unclear where that would fit in. Obviously, many of us in this House believe strongly that there is a need for urgent changes to public order legislation, so I hope the Minister will agree to enact such measures. I hope he will also agree to enact the measures I have been banging on about in my review and subsequently, in particular a proscription-style tool, but also stronger powers to tackle the hate-infested marches that have now reached crisis point. Jewish communities in Britain are under siege from all sides: from Islamist extremism, the far left and also, of course, the far right. These measures are deeply needed, and the Government must match their rhetoric with legislative action.

Prisoners for Palestine: Hunger Strikes

Lord Walney Excerpts

Monday 2nd February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Walney (CB)]

My Lords—

[Viscount Hailsham (Con)]

My Lords—

[Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms and Chief Whip (Lord Kennedy of Southwark) (Lab Co-op)]

It is the turn of the Cross Benches.

[Lord Walney (CB)]

My Lords, the Minister is to be commended for not giving concessions to those who have refused food in this instance. Does he not think that, rather than expressing sympathy for or condoning the behaviour of these individuals, the Government’s sympathy ought to be with the working people who have been terrorised by Palestine Action—which the people on remand and facing charges are linked to—including a security guard who was attacked with a sledgehammer? Is it not more important to protect their welfare than to eulogise this behaviour?

[Lord Timpson (Lab)]

Our prison and probation staff do an incredible job in dealing with some of the most complicated people in this country. When they turn up to work, they turn up to help people turn their lives around, not to get assaulted or be, as has happened recently, hospitalised as a result. It is our job to make sure that we keep our prisons safe not just for those people who live and work in them but also for people who are going into and out of work.

Trials: Timeliness

Lord Walney Excerpts

Monday 10th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Levitt (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for that, and I can understand why that seems like an obvious solution. But the separation of powers between the Government and the courts is one of the fundamental protections of any citizen. Therefore, putting pressure on judges to alter a judicial decision would be wrong and is something that this Government will not do. What I can say is that all judges—I know this because I was one—do not just take cases in the order in which they come into the system; they prioritise certain categories. For example, those with vulnerable victims and witnesses, particularly children, will always jump the queue. Where the Lady Chief Justice and her judges put these particular cases is a matter for them, and I am sure that she will look at them with the attention they deserve.

[Lord Walney (CB)]

I of course accept what the Minister says, but there can be a dialogue with the Government. We saw that last year in Southport, where the Attorney-General and the Prime Minister worked with the prosecution system to ensure that a message was getting through that crimes would have quick consequences to deter further action. Is there not a case for doing this with politically motivated crimes, such as Palestine Action and other politically motivated areas, where the lack of deterrence is increasing the prospect of the ringleaders being able to recruit more people into the net?

[Baroness Levitt (Lab)]

The noble Lord raises an interesting point. I can understand why it could be seen that the responses to the riots had been prioritised, but there are many reasons why those prosecutions took place very quickly. The first is that many of the cases were straightforward and could be dealt with in a magistrates’ court; the second is that, in relation to many of them, the evidence was very strong and people pleaded guilty; and the third is that the decisions involved were made by the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the independent judiciary. The Government made sure that they had the resources if they needed them, but no pressure was put on them to decide how to do it.

European Convention on Human Rights

Lord Walney Excerpts

Thursday 17th July 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

Yes, I can give the confirmation that the noble Lord seeks. He sets out the case, as I think I did in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Lilley, but the reality is that this is just one aspect—it is the relationship with the ECHR that we are talking about—but there need to be a number of ways of tackling irregular immigration, which is a profound and difficult issue. We are doing that in parallel, as well as addressing the Article 8 issue.

[Lord Walney (CB)]

My Lords, it is helpful that the Minister acknowledges that the convention needs to evolve and that there are issues with it. However, given the truth of what was just said about the difficulty and slowness of achieving unanimity in any negotiation, and if the Minister accepts that there is a significant problem, should not the Government reserve the right to withdraw if a negotiation cannot achieve what is needed for the country?

[Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede (Lab)]

I just do not think we are in that position at present. We can amend our own legislation regarding Article 8. There is the margin of appreciation which noble Lord, Lord Marks, referred to. As I said earlier, there is more discretion within that than is widely acknowledged or used—within not just the UK but Europe as a whole.

Protection of Prison Staff

Lord Walney Excerpts

Tuesday 13th May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Timpson (Lab)]

The noble Lord is right that drugs are a massive problem in our prisons. Some 49% of people arriving in prison tell us they are addicted to drugs, and then we put them in a prison with serious organised criminals who make a lot of money out of selling drugs to them, so clearly we have a problem. However, I am interested not just in tackling drugs getting into prisons—how we tackle drones and illegal contraband coming in—but in how people can leave prison not addicted, so that when they leave prison they do not go back.

[Lord Walney (CB)]

These attacks were made by dangerous individuals who had been imprisoned because of their violent radicalism, but there remains the problem of radicalisation within prisons once prisoners arrive on the estate. What assessment has the Minister made in his early months of the scale of this within the prison system and the current level of resilience in what the state and prison officers can do to protect prisoners from it?

[Lord Timpson (Lab)]

Any gang member is a problem in our prisons. We need to make sure that we identify where they are and do all that we can to limit their activities. We know that the best way of dealing with these complex people is by trusting the staff and their expertise at dealing with them, and we need to we give them every tool at their disposal to make sure that these people are not dangerous to themselves, to other prisoners and, most importantly, to staff.