New Autism Strategy (Autism Act 2009 Committee Report)

Lord Kamall Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Kamall (Con)]

My Lords, I begin by thanking my noble friend Lady Rock for opening this debate, for her work as chair of the Autism Act 2009 Committee, and for her wonderfully concise and coherent summary of the report’s findings. It comes as no surprise to me to hear about her chairing skills and the way she was able to convene people of vastly different views together—and to put noble Lords such as noble Lord, Lord Addington, in order, as it were.

I thank all noble Lords who served on the committee—including the noble Lord, Lord Wigley, who, despite his understandable frustration, managed to persist and contribute in a meaningful way—and the individuals and organisations who gave evidence to the committee. As the noble Baroness, Lady Goudie, said, without them there would be no report.

The Autism Act 2009 was a landmark piece of legislation introduced by the late Conservative MP, Dame Cheryl Gillan, and passed with cross-party support. I pay tribute, as other noble Lords have, to her friend, my noble friend Lady Browning, for championing this issue for so many years. I learned much from her contributions on the Mental Health Bill and from one-to-one conversations about autism.

The Act was the first disability-specific Act of its kind anywhere in the world and established the important principle that people with autism—or autistic people—should not be overlooked by government or public services and should receive the support they need to live independent and fulfilling lives. The committee’s report provides a stark assessment of what more must be done for that ambition to be realised. As others have said, why is it not being done?

Across healthcare, education, employment, housing, and the criminal justice system, autistic people continue to face barriers that limit their opportunity and diminish their quality of life. As your Lordships have heard, the committee’s central recommendations were straight- forward and unambiguous. It urged the Government to begin work immediately on a new cross-government autism strategy to come into effect when the current strategy expires in 2026.

However, the Government’s response has been commented on as notably cautious. The noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie of Downpatrick, said it could have been stronger. While Ministers agreed to consider the committee’s recommendations, they declined to commit to many of the report’s specific proposals. Since then, unfortunately, we have had little clarity about what will replace the current strategy or, indeed, whether there will be a new strategy and, if so, when it will be published. That uncertainty is clearly of concern to noble Lords on all Benches and those who work or live with autistic patients or family members.

I was grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Dacres of Lewisham, for sharing her experience from local government. When we are talking about national strategies, we often ignore the local elements. The current national strategy, published by the last Conservative Government in 2021, established six priority areas: understanding, support, employment, health inequality, community support, and justice. While there has been some progress, as the noble Lord, Lord Touhig, said, progress has been insufficient under Governments of all colours. That means that those priorities remain highly relevant today. Regrettably, the evidence presented to the committee suggests that many of these challenges remain unresolved.

One area of particular concern is diagnosis and assessment, as the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hope of Craighead, pointed out. The number of people seeking autism and ADHD assessments has increased dramatically in recent years. The Government recognised the scale of this challenge by commissioning the independent review into autism and ADHD diagnosis. I saw that the interim report was updated today, in advance of the final report that is expected this summer. There are legitimate questions about how services should respond to the growing demand but, whatever conclusions the review reaches, one fact is beyond dispute: rising demand makes effective planning more important, not less.

The committee rightly emphasised that support should not be delayed any longer than necessary. It asked the Government to outline what steps they are taking to ensure that support is based on genuine need and is sustainable. So, in seeking answers from the Government, I repeat the questions asked by my noble friend Lady Rock. Do the Government expect to publish a new autism strategy before the current one expires? If not, when will they publish it? Will it be accompanied by updated statutory guidance under the Autism Act, as recommended by the committee? How will the findings of the independent review be incorporated into that work?

On employment, the previous Conservative Government took important steps to support disabled people into work, including through the national disability strategy and the local supported employment programme. Yet too many autistic people remain excluded from the labour market despite possessing valuable skills and talents, as my noble friend Lord Elliott pointed out when he very movingly shared his own experience. Indeed, I remember speaking to a Transport Minister, who shall remain nameless, who told me that when it comes to the timetabling for railway services, quite often the very best people in timetabling are those who are somewhere on the spectrum. That just shows that we are not taking advantage of those very specific skills that would contribute to the economy and the growth that this Government want to see.

The noble Baroness, Lady Antrobus, spoke about the importance of relationship and sex education. It is an important point, which she was right to emphasise, because it is one of the ways in which we can raise awareness and make people who are autistic—or autistic people—feel more included in our communities.

We welcome the Government’s stated ambition to reduce economic inactivity and narrow the disability employment gap, but ambitions alone are not enough—the detail and delivery matter. My noble friend Lord Sterling spoke very movingly about wanting a better future for his autistic grandchildren.

On healthcare and community support, the committee heard compelling evidence about health inequalities and the continuing challenges faced by autistic people in in-patient settings. During the passage of the Mental Health Bill, MPs and Peers on all Benches were repeatedly pressed for robust plans to ensure adequate community support. The lack of sufficient support has been made clear in the report. I thank and pay tribute to the autism charities and advocacy organisations that have continued to hold Governments of all political affiliations to account. Their message has been consistent: autistic people and their families must be at the heart of policy development.

The committee has provided the Government with a clear road map. The challenge now is not in identifying the problems but in delivering the solutions. Those of us, from all parties, who have been in government know that good intentions often come up against the Treasury’s financial discipline. That is no bad thing, since we expect the Treasury to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent wisely. But this is where fine aspirations often meet financial prudence. So I ask the Minister: has there been any assessment of the cost of delivering the strategy? The noble Baroness, Lady Hollins, alluded to the cost. If there is an estimated cost, and if it has met resistance from competing priorities within the relevant government departments, or from other government departments, as the noble Lord, Lord Crisp, spoke about—the state fighting the state—or even from the Treasury, has the Minister’s department looked at which of the recommendations could be delivered by better deploying existing spending?

Which recommendations might actually save the Government money? As the noble Lord, Lord Addington, said, many of these people will become taxpayers, save the Government money and contribute more positively. Which of the recommendations may have to wait for future spending rounds? I hope the Minister will accept that I ask those questions in a spirit of pragmatism and trying to be constructive.

The Autism Act was a pioneering piece of legislation. Seventeen years later, the report from the committee chaired by my noble friend Lady Rock makes it clear that autistic people deserve clear leadership and a credible strategy for the future. I look forward to hearing from the Minister about the work that is under way and how, when and with whom it will be delivered. I hope she is able to provide reassurance to noble Lords across the House who have raised many concerns and want to work constructively with the Government to deliver for autistic people.