New Autism Strategy (Autism Act 2009 Committee Report)

Lord Wigley Excerpts

Wednesday 10th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Wigley (PC)]

My Lords, I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak in this short debate, as I was to serve on the Select Committee, although I did experience certain frustrations. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Rock, for her huge commitment to autism and the balanced way in which she chaired the committee. I also thank the clerk, advisers, researchers and staff, who had to cope with a huge volume of evidence and of witnesses who appeared before us. I thank the numerous organisations that gave evidence, in person or in written form. I also acknowledge our debt to the noble Baroness, Lady Browning, who has campaigned on these issues for several decades, and who was instrumental in getting the 2009 Act on to the statute book.

I mentioned frustration, This arose from having been involved for several years in Autism Cymru and being a Member of this House not domiciled in England. In my 27 years in the Commons, I was heavily involved in disability campaigning and, on returning to the Chamber in 2011, I looked forward to resuming such campaigning work, not least in association with the much-loved late Lord Rix at Mencap. But, on returning, I found myself in no man’s land, because many aspects of disability politics had been devolved.

As stated in paragraph 31 of the report, the UK Government’s autism strategy applies “to England only”. As noble Lords may appreciate, my role in the committee was at times limited and sometimes a cause of personal frustration. I put this on the record as it might be relevant to the authorities of the House when they select Members to serve on “England only” committees in future. The committee invited and received evidence from the Governments of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, which was appreciated but could be only tangential to this inquiry.

I regret the very limited consideration given by our committee to international practices, which I raised at an early stage because of the huge benefits I had experienced as a member of the Brussels-based Autism Europe. In representing Autism Cymru on that committee, I learned a huge amount relating to good practice in European countries, including many outside the EU. It is my feeling that we could have benefited by considering what lessons we could learn from such European countries.

As soon as it was public, I passed a copy of our report to a senior member of Autism Europe, Mrs Liga Berzina of Latvia, which stated that there are certainly aspects of autism policies in England which rightly get international praise, such as the Autism Act, the ongoing development of a national autism strategy and the SEND framework of educational, health and care plans. From her experience, a key dimension is that every school should have an additional learning needs co-ordinator, with support delivered through individual development plans. Just as other countries benefit from studying experience in England, surely we at Westminster can benefit from considering successful initiatives in other countries.

With regard to the welter of evidence submitted to us, I had three abiding thoughts. First, of all the challenges and experiences we were trying to encapsulate in an integrated approach, there needs to be a flexibility to cope with the huge diversity of challenges and opportunities facing those on the spectrum; such policy applications must therefore be local, as they relate to individual needs. Secondly, we must always see the abilities and potential of those who experience such challenges. It was quite stimulating to receive evidence from such witnesses, and that underscores our responsibility to secure from government a fitting response. Thirdly, our aspirations cannot be secured without additional resources. The magnitude of the cohort crudely described as being “on the spectrum” has grown hugely as our understanding of individual needs has matured. As these individuals get the opportunity to blossom, such policies in due course bear fruit. If the Government merely respond that “There is no more available cash”, they simply have their priorities wrong.

Despite my doubts about serving on this committee, for the reasons outlined, I support the recommendations and hope that the Government will give them an urgent and positive response.