UK Space Economy

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 11th March 2026 Lords Chamber

Tabled by

[Viscount Stansgate]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to support the UK space economy.

[Baroness Ashton of Upholland (Lab)]

My Lords, at the request of my noble friend Lord Stansgate, and with his permission, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in his name on the Order Paper.

International Women’s Day

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Friday 6th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords—or can I just say “Colleagues”?—I am very glad to have the opportunity to contribute to today’s debate, and what a pleasure it is to follow my noble friend Lady Thornton. I congratulate all the maiden speakers today. They were all excellent. They will all enrich the House, and I am sure they all feel all the better for having given them. I also congratulate the Minister on introducing the debate and the way in which she did and for highlighting an area that is why I want to take part today.

I want to talk about the position of women in science. I thank all the organisations that have been in touch with me to raise issues they think are important. I want to pay tribute to them and place on record, in this Chamber and in Hansard, the names of the following scientific organisations: the Council for the Mathematical Sciences, the Royal Society of Biology, the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the Society of Chemical Industry, the Physiological Society, the Genetics Society, Applied Microbiology International, the Society for Experimental Biology, the Campaign for Science and Engineering, the Royal Society and, indeed, someone who wrote to me from AstraZeneca. I cannot do justice to the information I have: it is all here, and I intend to present it to the Librarian of the House for the benefit of Members and staff, because it is what you might call a Polaroid, or perhaps these days I should say “screenshot”, of the current position of women in science.

Of course, it is depressing that things do not change as quickly as we would hope. In a nutshell, women in science in the UK continue to face a cluster of interconnected structural, cultural and career progression barriers. The most significant issues probably centre on persistent underrepresentation, hostile or exclusionary work environments, slow advancement into senior roles and systematic biases that begin early in education and get worse throughout their careers. All the societies, without exception, have asked for better data collection and monitoring—perhaps the Minister, when she winds up, can say something about that point—and all stress the importance of role models.

I shall give the House an example. I am a member of the Numeracy for Life Committee, which met yesterday. We were discussing how maths is considered difficult, especially at a young age, partly because of a lack of confidence from parents and teachers. We had two inspirational witnesses giving evidence, one of whom was Professor Hannah Fry. What a role model she is. They talked about the importance of making maths fun as it is such an important determinant of future progress.

Turning to the main issues that have been raised, I am afraid that the leaky pipeline still exists. Women remain underrepresented in core STEM fields at every stage. There is gradual improvement, but that is the problem—it is gradual. Women make up only about a third of core STEM students in higher education but, at current rates, parity in engineering could take 70 years. Women account for about a quarter of the UK’s STEM workforce and progress is so slow that equal representation is unlikely before 2070. Only about 10% of UK inventors on patent applications in 2024 were women, and parity is forecast to be decades away.

The Royal Society of Biology says that there are persistent gender inequalities across the scientific pipeline and not enough professors in the core sciences. The Royal Society of Chemistry says that, whereas 48% of undergraduates in chemistry are women in, only 15% are professors; there will, apparently, be parity by 2067. We know that median salaries are lower for women than men, but I found striking a report that said that the disparity in bonuses between men and women reaches 80% or more.

Time is pressing, so I cannot go through everything. I apologise to those societies of which I can make no mention. Other issues are familiar to the House. The Society for Experimental Biology reports derogatory labelling by senior male professors with no consequences for them and the dismissal of professional opinions as “emotional”. Many raised the issue that women still too often have to choose between a career and a family.

There are some hopeful signs. The Society of Chemical Industry says that, although its membership is 70:30 in proportion, for those members who are under 30 it is 50:50. The Royal Society reports that women-founded tech companies in the UK raised £3.6 billion in venture capital funding in 2022—up £700 million on the previous year. That is encouraging.

I want to close with a few positive points, as there are initiatives that are having an effect, although I do not have the time to talk about them. The Royal Society is holding a meeting on Tuesday about the position of women in science in the future.

I end with an invitation. On 17 March, we hold the annual STEM for Britain event in Parliament. It is organised by the Parliamentary and Scientific Committee—I declare an interest as its president. The event brings together and presents the best work of early-career scientists in all the major disciplines. It is very competitive, they are judged accordingly and the final prize is given to the person who best explains their work. The proportion of women taking part in this year’s event is over 50%. That is a sign of the future, and all I can say is that the future cannot come soon enough.

Social Media: Non-consensual Sexual Deepfakes

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 14th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)]

The proposed offence will target tools which are specifically designed to generate non-consensual intimate images. General purpose AI tools which are not designed solely or principally to generate non-consensual images will not be included; this is for those that are designed specifically for that purpose.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I hope the whole House welcomes the Secretary of State’s Statement. Can my noble friend say whether it is thought that the social media platform X understands the revulsion caused by its AI Grok tool? I ask this question of my noble friend because the reported comments of the founder of X certainly suggest that he does not, and some aspects of the initial reaction by the company, such as saying it is acceptable as long as it is paid for, suggest that that it simply has no idea about the strength of the public reaction to this.

[Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)]

I cannot speak for others but, from our perspective, it is clear under the Online Safety Act what illegal content is, and what the child safety duties are. Operating in the United Kingdom means abiding by those; it means doing the risk assessments, taking swift action against priority offences, and abiding by all of the regime in place here in the UK.

NHS: Single-sex Spaces for Staff

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Thursday 1st May 2025 Grand Committee

[Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom (Con)]

Before the Minister stands up, we have the benefit of having the chair of the EHRC in the Room with us. I wonder whether it is your Lordships’ wish that we hear from her.

[The Deputy Chairman of Committees (Viscount Stansgate) (Lab)]

My Lords, I am in the hands of the Committee, but the fact is, as Members will know, people are entitled to ask to speak in the gap, but the gap had already been passed by the time the Member concerned sought to do so. I can say no more at this stage.

Life Sciences Businesses

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Monday 26th February 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I totally agree with the noble Baroness. I would go further and say that one policy motor that has been successful so far is these life science investment zones, particularly in Liverpool. I had the privilege to meet with Steve Rotherham today and the metro mayors, who have been leading across the board and in Yorkshire, to find an essence of focus for the investment into these new technologies. We are doing a huge amount of work on university spin-offs as well—organisations such as Northern Gritstone and Midlands Mindforge are the absolute core of the work I am doing to get money internationally into these pools of capital.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, my question arises out of the one just asked. Can the Minister elaborate on what the Government are doing to spread the excellent work of the life sciences in this country more evenly around the UK?

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I hope I have answered this to some extent. There is no limit to the amount of work that we can do to get more investment into this sector. It starts from the smallest opportunities at universities, where we can put more money into life science spin-out funds, trying to help the organisations that pool that capital, as I say. It is about trying to establish bases in London for the key life sciences funds from abroad, and working with sovereign wealth funds, the biggest pension funds and the UK pension fund industry to put money into the industry. That is an important start.

Automotive Manufacturing Sector: Support

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Monday 15th May 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I believe that the outcome has been relatively satisfactory, with the purchase of Britishvolt by Recharge Industries, which I have met on several occasions to ensure that it is committed to investing in this country. It will make non-vehicular batteries to begin with but has reassured me that it will ultimately make batteries that can be used in EVs. It is not true that we do not have prospects. As we know in this House, there has been £1 billion of investment in the Sunderland plant for Envision to allow us to make electric vehicles made by Nissan.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, further to the answer the Minister gave a moment ago, when he gazes down on the country from his hot-air balloon, can he tell us where the gigafactory for the manufacture of electric batteries, on which the future automotive industry of this country is going to depend, will be?

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I have tried to cover the key areas where we are investing significantly alongside industry to build our EV industry. We have several important pools of capital. I have not mentioned UKEF, which has through various loan schemes also supported our existing and future manufacturers. On top of that, through the Faraday challenge we are investing very heavily in R&D, because innovation will drive the technological change that will give us these opportunities in the future.

CPTPP: Conclusion of Negotiations

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 19th April 2023 Lords Chamber

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I am always grateful to my noble friend for his eloquence. He is a very difficult act to follow, even though his question is so true to my heart. I am afraid I will not be drawn into suggesting who should potentially be admitted into the CPTPP because we are not yet members, but as I said, I am delighted that this entire organisation acts as beacon of free trade around the world. We want more countries to see the world through the lens of us and our aligned partners. I very much support, conceptually, many of my noble friend’s comments and I thank him for his support in this House and for continually making sure that the torch of free trade is held high in this place.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, the Minister complained earlier of having been insufficiently appreciated for this Statement, but I am more than happy to congratulate him for including in his answer the comments of one of Abraham Lincoln’s most distinguished Cabinet members.

I want to ask a brief question about Vietnam which has, in part, been asked already by the noble Lord opposite. The Statement refers to Vietnam particularly with regard to legal and other services. Can the Minister explain in more detail what else the Government are expecting to get out of enhanced arrangements and trade with Vietnam, in addition to the arrangement we already have?

[Lord Johnson of Lainston (Con)]

I am grateful to the noble Viscount. I was not asking for praise for myself or enthusiasm for my own actions, but enthusiasm for the actions of the Secretary of State, the department and this Government in pursuing this noble free-trade policy, which will ultimately enrich us all and make us safer.

The noble Viscount asks very sensible questions about the specificity of our relationship with Vietnam regarding the CPTPP. As I have said, the CPTPP contains a large number of chapters that will allow us more effectively to achieve market access for our goods, and with greater haste. In my view, that is in itself a very positive point. I have touched on some of the other aspects that apply broadly to the CPTPP, and I am happy to repeat the statistic I was sent this morning, although I cannot guarantee its legitimacy. Maybe I should declare an interest, to some extent: I have personal financial shareholdings in companies that invest in these countries, although I am not involved in them directly, as noble Lords can imagine. Vietnam is forecast to grow faster than any major country on earth between now and 2050. I would have thought any arrangement that allows us access to a market of that dynamic nature must be a positive for this country.

If we consider our long-term security and the importance of diversifying our supply chain and looking at how our supplying countries interact with us, I cannot think of any more powerful ally than Vietnam in this instance. I look forward to visiting that nation and seeing if we can encourage investment from there into the UK.