House of Lords
Special Envoy for Post-Holocaust Issues
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Wills
To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made with the Special Envoy for Post-Holocaust Issues in fulfilling the remit of that role; and what plans they have to deliver on every part of that remit by the end of 2026.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Winterton of Doncaster) (Lab)
Since his appointment in February, the UK Special Envoy for Post-Holocaust Issues has undertaken a range of international engagements to progress work on Holocaust remembrance and education, restitution and tackling antisemitism. The envoy regularly meets international counterparts and domestic stakeholders to discuss practical areas for co-operation on these issues. He reports to the Minister for Human Rights on progress, as outlined in his terms of reference.
Lord Wills (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Does she share my view about the urgent need to tackle the poison of antisemitism that is once again seeping into our public life? Does she share my view about the importance of the role that our Special Envoy for Post-Holocaust Issues has to play in that? In that context, what discussions has the envoy had with international partners about advancing outstanding Holocaust-era restitution claims across Europe and other ways of recognising victims of the Holocaust, such as Stolpersteine? What progress has been made with Poland in particular?
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for his question. He is absolutely right. We have a shared responsibility to tackle the abhorrent rise in antisemitism. Recognising the Holocaust is a crucial part of this, which the envoy continues to work on. In September, the envoy attended the post-Holocaust issues special envoys network meeting on movable restitution, where participants agreed to focus on fixed private property restitution. At last week’s Special Envoys and Coordinators Combating Antisemitism meeting in Dublin, the envoy agreed a co-ordinated approach to Holocaust-era restitution in Poland with his US counterpart. He also raised the issue with the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Warsaw. The Stolpersteine initiative to which my noble friend referred is excellent. We are supporting communities in Guernsey to lay Stolpersteine outside the homes of residents who resisted the Nazi occupation.
Lord Austin of Dudley (Non-Afl)
My Lords, while we are on the subject of antisemitism, is the Minister aware that Parliament has been discussing Israel more than any other issue—not just international issues such as Yemen or Sudan, but even domestic issues such as the cost of living, the NHS and immigration? Does she share my concern that this obsessive focus on the world’s only Jewish state is bound to drive hostility towards people who are identified with it, which is the vast majority of Jewish people in the UK? I think Parliament and the media are playing a large part in the explosion of antisemitism that we are seeing here in Britain.
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
The noble Lord makes an important point about the role of the media and Parliament in discussing these issues. However, I feel that, as a Parliament, we have to back the work of the special envoys, for example, so that we are supporting that work and endorsing the actions that are taken.
Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (LD)
My Lords, given that the envoy’s remit includes securing progress on Holocaust-era property and art restitution, where survivors and their families have waited decades for justice, will the Government commit to publishing a clear assessment of progress against every objective, identifying which countries have been pressed to act, what tangible progress has been achieved—not just meetings—and what remains outstanding? How will they ensure that the deadline of the end of 2026 produces measurable progress on restitution rather than simply a record of meetings?
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for that question. The special envoy reports to the Minister for Human Rights, and we have answered a number of questions about the extensive work that he has undertaken. I might suggest, because I know the special envoy is certainly willing to do this, that he briefs Peers on the work that has been undertaken so far and on future work that is being planned. I hope that might be helpful to Peers, because I know there is a lot of interest in this and it is right that we draw attention to the work that the special envoy has done.
Lord Pickles (Con)
My Lords, for 10 years I was the Special Envoy for Post-Holocaust Issues. I commend to the House the work of my successor, Jon Pearce, who has done a remarkable job. However, the noble Lord hits the nail on the head: there is no restitution in Poland that is recognised. That is not an accident; it is a deliberate policy of its Government. I ask the Minister for another attempt at the highest level of government between ourselves, the United States and the European community to press upon Poland the need for action, because this remains a stain on that great nation’s reputation.
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for that question and for the work that he did as special envoy. I wonder if it might be helpful if he came along to the briefing as well, because it is important to show the continuity between the work that he did and the work that Jon Pearce is doing as the current special envoy. The noble Lord makes an important point. I emphasise again that the special envoy recently agreed a co-ordinated approach to Holocaust-era restitution in Poland with his US counterpart. He also raised the issue directly with the Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Warsaw. With international partners—it is important that that is how we do this—we continue to press Poland to confront this historic injustice and deliver a fair, comprehensive and final settlement of outstanding restitution claims.
Baroness Deech (CB)
My Lords, Poland has been an outlier in this for many decades. One feels that it is waiting for everyone to die so it can avoid making restitution. I encourage the Minister to take this issue to the Council of Europe, which is the best forum for this. It should be proposed to Poland that it allow litigation outside Poland, provide access to relevant records, establish a central fund as other countries have done to pay at least partial compensation and preserve the memory of the dispossessed by placing Stolpersteine outside their former homes. It has so far refused to do this, in an attempt to obliterate the memory, as I have seen there for myself.
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I thank the noble Baroness for her question and her long-standing campaigning on this issue. I know how deeply she feels about it. The special envoy has already been looking at some of the issues she has raised, but I will have further discussions with him about her point on the Council of Europe. Obviously, there are parliamentary delegations to that, so she may wish to raise it with representatives from this House who are on the Council of Europe too.
Lord Callanan (Con)
My Lords, building on the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, and my noble friend Lord Pickles, many Jewish families have not been reunited with their property looted by the Nazis and the special envoy, as has been said, has a responsibility to support restitution. Could the Minister say what estimate the Government have made of the number of British families who have not been reunited with property stolen by the Nazis and when the special envoy last met the independent Spoliation Advisory Panel?
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I do not have the figure on the number of British families to hand, but I will certainly see what I can find out and write to the noble Lord. I did not quite hear the body that he named, but I will ensure that the special envoy is aware of the point he has raised and, if it would be helpful, arrange a briefing for him with regard to that international body.
Lord Foulkes of Cumnock (Lab Co-op)
My Lords, as my noble friend knows, I have the honour of being one of the representatives of this Parliament to the Council of Europe. I assure the noble Baroness, Lady Deech, that we will make sure that this is taken up. On another matter, will the Minister ask the envoy to look into the revelations in the ITV documentary shown on Sunday night about some of the antisemitic and other racist remarks made by members of Reform UK and consider what action might be necessary?
Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for his offer with regard to the Council of Europe, of which he is a distinguished member. I am confident he will discuss with the noble Baroness what action may be taken. I will certainly ensure that the special envoy is aware of the programme to which he referred and see whether there is any action that needs to be taken in that area.
Cash and Card Payments: Reduction in Availability
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Blunkett
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they have had with the financial sector about the decline in acceptance of cash payments and the pending reduction in availability of card payments in favour of payment by smart devices.
The Parliamentary Secretary, HM Treasury (Lord Pitt-Watson) (Lab)
My Lords, the Government are committed to ensuring cash remains a viable method of payment. Initiatives with the financial sector include LINK, to ensure that cash machines are available, the Post Office for withdrawal and deposits, Cash Access UK for banking hubs, and others, and we await the Lloyd report. Regulation of these services is done by the FCA. Cash acceptance by businesses remains voluntary and levels of acceptance are kept under review.
Lord Blunkett (Lab)
I thank my noble friend. I remind the House that, some time ago, I asked the then Minister, the noble Baroness, Lady Vere, if she would come to dinner with me on the proviso that, if I could not access the payment system, she would be the one to pay. We never had the date. Will my noble friend bring pressure to bear on UK Finance to ensure that its terminal approval system mandates tactile covers for flat screen payment devices, so that people with little or no sight can maintain their privacy and have the equality that others take for granted?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
That is a really good question. There are some initiatives from UK Finance that we should commend; for example, its Accessible Cards Code of Practice, where the largest card issuers have committed to common standards for the design of future cards. UK Finance has also developed accessibility guidelines for touch screen chip and PIN devices, as well as an approved list of accessible card terminals and vendors. UK Finance and the British Retail Consortium are working together to identify opportunities to embed these features where customers need them most. However, there is still work to be done, and officials continue to raise the issue with UK Finance. I am more than happy to reinforce that message.
Lord Bailey of Paddington (Con)
My Lords, as I am sure the Minister knows, some of the most vulnerable people rely on cash to budget and administer their daily life. As the Minister pointed out, acceptance of cash is voluntary. Will the Government legislate so that essential services are forced to make sure they always accept cash, because some of the most vulnerable people can operate only with cash?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
There is no current plan for legislation, but this is being monitored. The British Retail Consortium believes that all its members are accepting cash, and I think 99% of corner shops are accepting cash. The Bank of England did a survey where 40% of people accepted that, where they had not been able to use cash, they had found somewhere else where they could get the service they wanted. This remains under review, rather than there being any plan at this stage, but the issue raised is an important one.
Baroness Kramer (LD)
My Lords, this is getting more complicated. In a year or so, payments, including some salaries, will start being paid in stablecoin. What happens if you do not have an electronic wallet? Even if you have a smartphone, how can you use it to access cash from an ATM? Who is going to pay for interoperability, and will it fall on the consumer or the banks but not on the companies that will make increased profits out of stablecoin?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
On people getting hold of cash, there are initiatives taking place. On future payment systems, the National Payments Vision is trying to put together what an entire system using different payments methodologies would look like. Some of this is work in progress, around where we are and where we are going.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab)
My Lords, has my noble friend looked at the experience of Sweden, where, a few years ago, there were a number of crashes and online payments were completely halted? The conclusion in Sweden was that it had to have a continuing element of cash payments. Are we looking at that?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
On this question of resilience, yes we are. For example, there is a project with Mastercard to support point-of-sale terminals from 2027 if the system failed, so that the system would still work. There is also a multi-year campaign on preparedness more generally—on the notion of what backups there are if, for example, our payment systems and ATMs failed. Again, that is work in progress, as is the Mastercard project, because it is not here yet.
Baroness Neville-Rolfe (Con)
My Lords, the truth is that not everyone is sophisticated financially, and those who are not tend to use cash, especially the elderly. There is a lot of concern in the House, given the increasing drift away from cash—for example, in car parks. Will the Government take steps to ensure that those who use cash can play a full part in the life of our nation, and actually get on with this?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
That is a good question. We are on top of the availability of cash through the banking system, but it is the case that acceptance of cash is voluntary, whether it is a car park, a retailer or the rest of it. That issue is under observation, rather than something on which there are direct plans. I point out that the other way that one can deal with this is to make sure that people have a way to pay by card. For example, the reduction of people who do not have bank accounts—from about 1.2 million to 900,000 over the past four years—is positive progress, but the noble Baroness makes a good point.
Baroness Hoey (Non-Afl)
My Lords, the noble Lord mentioned a review. Is he consulting pensioner groups across the country on this? They are particularly affected by the lack of cash and by having to use these modern devices. Can he give a commitment that no government department or institution will ever make it compulsory to use them, and that there will always be the option of using a card or cash?
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
I have talked about some reviews. When I talked about voluntary acceptance, I meant voluntary acceptance. As I say, we have data from the British Retail Consortium, the local shop association and the Bank of England and so on about whether that acceptance is currently a problem. There is no consultation on anything that would make acceptance of cash mandatory right now. Although the pensioner groups will be involved in those areas that I have talked about where reviews are taking place, it is not the case that a review of retail acceptance is taking place right now.
Lord Livingston of Parkhead (CB)
My Lords, although taking cash is obviously necessary for some groups, it is an increasingly expensive thing to do for a dwindling amount of cash. Will the Minister consider how one ensures that corner shops and high street shops do not bear the cost of this, while people who are online-only get away scot-free? The cost of providing cash must be borne across the retail and utility sector as a whole.
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
As I have explained, the choice is entirely voluntary for the people who accept cash right now. Some 99% of members of the local shop association are accepting cash right now. I realise that there are some fixed costs in accepting cash and that that makes it more and more costly. That is why, as I say, this is under observation by the Government, to make sure that we do not slip to a point where people are not able to buy the things that they need.
Baroness Prosser (Lab)
My Lords, I ask the House not to forget the purpose of this Question, which was to ensure that there is access to machinery for those who are either blind or partially sighted. We have moved on to other issues, which are of course important, but the whole point of the Question was to ensure that people with sight issues can access such equipment as is available. Please do not forget that.
Lord Pitt-Watson (Lab)
That is absolutely right. The Government recognise that individuals with visual impairments must be able to pay for products easily and safely. Considerable progress is being made on cards, but there is some progress still to be made on how chip and PIN services are used. I will reinforce that message from the House with UK Finance.
Corridor Care
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Pidgeon
To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress they have made on their commitment to end corridor care.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health and Social Care (Baroness Merron) (Lab)
My Lords, corridor care is unacceptable, and we are tackling its causes by preventing avoidable admissions, improving patient flow and accelerating safe discharge. Just this weekend, we announced almost £140 million for 14 urgent care schemes, alongside 25 new or expanded sites, which are due to open for winter. Despite unprecedented summer demand, around 50 trusts reduced corridor care. We are working to end corridor care by the end of this Parliament.
Baroness Pidgeon (LD)
My Lords, the Royal College of Emergency Medicine has reported today that two-thirds of clinical leads say their trust does not count as corridor care patients on chairs in corridors, patients who have been put on chairs in waiting rooms or even patients in corridors on the way in. What action will the Government take, and by when, to make sure that every trust counts every patient, so that we have a true picture of corridor care in this country?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
We are a lot closer to having a true picture, because in March this year we introduced a consistent national definition of corridor care, which I know the noble Baroness has been very keen on. In addition, for the first time monthly national data has been published since June, which is giving us greater visibility of where corridor care is occurring and, in particular, allowing support to be targeted at the most challenged hospitals.
Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab)
My Lords, in the 1990s, when I was a little boy, I was director of the Association of Community Health Councils. Each year, we ran something called National Casualty Watch, which involved local community health council members going into every local casualty department and not only counting the number of people there but asking them how long they had been waiting. Successive Secretaries of State, some of whom are in your Lordships’ Chamber, were not very happy about this, but it had a profound effect on making people realise that this is not a way to run A&E departments. Can my noble friend the Minister assure us that, given that the Government are rethinking their plans to abolish Healthwatch and national Healthwatch, facilities will be available for that sort of thing to continue in whatever new arrangements come forward?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
The principle of assessing patient experience, as my noble friend described, is absolutely key to the Health Bill, and I know we will discuss this more. Since my noble friend was a young pup—as he described himself, in a different way—we now have the facilities to be much more transparent and to use data. It is important to say that the collection of data is new—it started only this year and did not exist before—and we are continuing to work with providers to improve the consistency and quality of reporting. That is absolutely key.
Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB)
My Lords, given that three-quarters of physicians report difficulties in accessing essential equipment, sometimes including resuscitation equipment, for patients in corridors, and even more report compromised care, what work are the Government now undertaking with the Royal College of Emergency Medicine to increase the provision of medical assessment units, particularly working with the clinical governance leads for those emergency departments?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
All of this is important, as the noble Baroness said. We are already undertaking a number of actions and one is about additional urgent care capacity; for example, in total some £2 billion is going into urgent care, particularly capital projects, which the noble Baroness did not specifically mention. The improvement of facilities, which is part of this, is absolutely key, as is getting care closer to home. With the kinds of improvements we are already seeing—for example, the emergency departments at Basildon and North Tees have had refurbishments—and by working with clinical leads, we will improve a long-standing situation that should never have been normalised and should only be exceptional.
Baroness Browning (Con)
I am sure that the Minister has seen some of the hospitals that have solved this problem. Is there a problem with hospitals that have overcome what is a very difficult problem sharing that information with other hospitals that are struggling? It always amazes me: when you see best practice, you just do not understand why it is not shared. If they do not voluntarily share it, is there anything the Minister can do to make them share it?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
The noble Baroness is right. While we are very mindful of the need to make more progress, sharing best practice is key to how we are improving things across the whole pathway. The majority of corridor care occurs in a small number of trusts, and that is why we are putting in targeted teams to work with those trusts to do exactly what the noble Baroness suggests.
The Lord Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham
My Lords, I pay tribute to the NHS staff who provide vital care under immense pressure. Recent reporting from the Queen’s Medical Centre in my diocese of Southwell and Nottingham has highlighted their compassion and professionalism. Does the Minister agree that the challenge of corridor care is one not only of clinical safety and privacy but of human dignity? Hospital chaplains provide invaluable pastoral and spiritual support to patients and families at moments of vulnerability and distress. What consideration have the Government given to ensuring that access to such support is not diminished when patients are cared for in temporary settings?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
I pay tribute to the service provided by hospital chaplains, because they extend support to those of all faiths and none, and that is crucial. Corridor care is not an acceptable normalisation. We want to end it by the end of the Parliament. I agree that dignity is very much part of it. The guidance given to hospitals is that, in exceptions where there has to be corridor care, they must take account of supporting the patient in the best way possible. For example, that can, of course, include support from hospital chaplains.
Lord Kamall (Con)
My Lords, the Minister said that the department, or maybe NHS England, has been able to identify the hospitals where corridor care is at its worst levels. What specific targeted support does the Minister’s department or NHS England intend to offer to those particular hospitals in order to reduce the high levels of corridor care?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
We are putting in specialist teams to work with those particular hospitals. The Secretary of State has made it quite clear that ending corridor care for children is an absolute priority. As I said to the noble Baroness earlier, we are ensuring that best practice is applied. Because of the additional funding, we have been able to and will be able to extend capacity. The noble Lord will have looked at the areas that are receiving targeted financial support. Where we have greater levels of corridor care, our teams are working with those hospitals to say, “Why is this the case? This is how to sort it out”, and make sure that they can. The small number of trusts means that there is greater reliance in some areas than others, and that is not all right.
Baroness Watkins of Tavistock (CB)
My Lords, what additional support are the Government going to give to the healthcare staff in accident and emergency departments, who are feeling very demoralised following a difficult summer and now face a difficult winter? Most importantly, in preventive terms, is it not time that we linked care in the community by subcontracting some beds in care homes, so that patients who could be discharged immediately if that was available can be, to enable things to be a bit better for staff and patients this winter?
Baroness Merron (Lab)
I share the views of the noble Baroness, as I do the comments of the right reverend Prelate about the role that our healthcare staff play. The noble Baroness is right about the connection with social care. Better patient flow and discharge actually rely on that, and that is why we have published the Model Emergency Department, the Model Acute Pathway and the Model Discharge Pathway, so that we can see earlier assessment, timely senior clinical review, improved discharge and better patient flow, because it is down to beds and also to pressure. If there is one thing we are promoting in terms of prevention, it is for everybody to get a flu jab who is eligible, because we want to prevent people unnecessarily presenting at hospital. That will assist us greatly.
Drought: Impact and Policies
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of drought statuses in England; and what policies they plan to implement, if any, to reduce the likelihood and impact of future droughts.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock) (Lab)
My Lords, over 80% of England is in drought, and that affects around 50 million people. Parts of the country have entered severe drought for the first time, due to depleted reservoirs following an extremely dry summer. This Government are committed to a twin-track approach to improving water resilience and have secured £104 billion of private investment to fund urgent action to improve water efficiency and reduce leakage, alongside new supply infrastructure, which includes nine new reservoirs.
Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Lab)
My Lords, as my noble friend the Minister has stated, only last week a severe warning for drought was declared in parts of southern England. Given earlier warnings about the severity of the El Niño effect this winter, what discussions have been held with the National Drought Group about conserving and storing water supplies as part of that monetary allocation during periods of persistent rainfall over the wintertime, including the removal of barriers to the construction of farm reservoirs, which would help protect food security throughout the year?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The Government engage with water companies, the Environment Agency, the Met Office and key sectors through the National Drought Group, because we want to ensure proper co-ordinated action. The Met Office regularly updates on the potential impacts of El Niño, which helps to ensure that the group is prepared to respond. Of course, the impacts of El Niño are uncertain, but we are aware that it could contribute to continued dry conditions into autumn and winter, which could further reduce the opportunities to refill reservoirs.
Defra has announced a further £15 million of support to build on-farm reservoirs through the water management grant. To enable farmers to make better use of water during wetter periods, Defra is also taking steps towards a more dynamic abstraction licensing system. The Environment Agency has committed to reviewing its approach to abstraction and has introduced a regulatory position statement, which brings reservoir refill season forward from November to October.
Baroness Grender (LD)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that, with the severe droughts declared in parts of the south-west and south-east, and water companies still losing nearly 3 billion litres a day to leakage, the clean water Bill is needed now? Are the rumours true that it has been delayed again? Can she tell us when it will be introduced, given that she told us last month that she hoped to bring it shortly?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
I assure the noble Baroness that we are actively working on the water Bill. It is an absolute priority, not just for the department but for the Prime Minister. We absolutely need to get it right. There is a lot of work going into it. A lot of changes are needed to the water industry if we are going to really make the difference that we want to make. In fact, I have only today had a meeting where I have discussed it, so it is something that we are actively working on.
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)
My Lords, may I commend to the Minister the report from the Environment and Climate Change Select Committee, on drought preparedness and the need to have environmental and economic assessments every year before the next drought? Obviously, I regret the situation in Yorkshire, where we have entered drought for the first time. This morning I was at a meeting of the Association of Drainage Authorities. It said that there is a crying need for small on-farm reservoirs but the barriers are still there. These are taxation barriers, permitted development and planning barriers, and others. Will she please use her best offices to make sure that these barriers are removed and that small on-farm reservoirs can proceed to be built?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The noble Baroness makes a very good point. One of the issues, not just of on-farm reservoirs but others around farming, is the planning system. We as a department have been working very closely with MHCLG to update planning guidance in order to strengthen support for agricultural infrastructure, whatever form that infrastructure takes. The National Planning Policy Framework, which was published in August, is looking to start to do this, and we are working with industry to look at further planning reforms that we could bring in that would help.
The Duke of Wellington (CB)
My Lords, the Minister referred to leakage. I believe it is still government policy to try to reduce leakage by 50% by 2050. In view of the severe drought conditions this year and generally, would it not be wise to have a more ambitious target?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
I always like ambition—it is a very good thing—but we have to set targets that are attainable and achievable. As the noble Duke said, water companies have to halve leakage across the industry by 2050—that is compared with 2017-18 levels. We saw a 12% reduction in total leakage last year, and we want to continue that and move more quickly, so we have invested £720 million through the current Ofwat price review period in smart technology, including meters, to help identify and reduce leakage. I am sure that if we can move more quickly, we will be very happy to do so.
Lord Shamash (Lab)
My Lords, in view of the kind of climate that we are all now entering into, what thought have the Government given, perhaps in the water Bill, to the construction of desalination plants?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
Obviously, desalination is an important part of moving forward when we have concerns around the amount of water that we have, and we are very keen to work more proactively in this space. One thing I am sure my noble friend is aware of is that water companies need to demonstrate that schemes will maintain secure water supplies. That includes the eight new desalination schemes that have been proposed in the current water resourcing management plan, so it is something we are keen to move forward with.
Lord Roborough (Con)
My Lords, I declare my interest as a farmer and landowner. Water company investment in nature-based solutions to drought resilience, as well as flood prevention and water quality, is disadvantaged against grey infrastructure due to the continued scepticism of the Environment Agency and the bureaucratic approach of other arm’s-length bodies. Re-wetting, decanalising, riparian planting and peatland restoration demonstrate strong results in short timeframes while delivering significant benefits to our rural economy and to nature restoration. Can the Minister assure us that the Government will remove this bias in the forthcoming clean water Bill and allow the acceleration of nature-based solutions?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
Clearly, I am not in a position to tell noble Lords what will be in the Bill, but I can assure the noble Lord that nature-based solutions are a very important part of the Government’s work in managing the situation regarding climate change and drought. Providing more integrated sustainable solutions is where we make the difference—even things such as creating better soil quality can make a huge difference. The three main aims around nature-based solutions for water that we are looking at are better groundwater resources, improving low flows in rivers, and improving our resilience to drought. We need to look at the effective schemes that we can bring forward, and that does not have to be just through the water Bill.
Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)
My Lords, Thames Water, which I am a customer of, will run out of money within the next few weeks. Eighteen months ago it was given £3 billion to keep going and now it is asking for a further £2.4 billion. Why on earth is Thames Water not in special administration already?
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
The simple answer to that is that the rules for special administration make it quite difficult for the Government to put Thames Water into special administration while it is still financing itself. I know the noble Baroness is saying that it is about to run out of money, but on paper and in its finances, it is continuing to operate as a company and to provide water. The question is: how long are the Government prepared to accept the current situation? That is something we are looking at.
Lord Spellar (Lab)
My Lords, I ask the Minister to reflect on the irony of the Liberal Democrats raising the issue of water shortages in the south-east and south-west, when their party was at the forefront of campaigning against new reservoirs—
Lord Spellar (Lab)
I thank my fan club—particularly at Didcot in the Thames Valley.
Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)
We had a Question on reservoirs last week, and I think I made the point then that I am going to make now, which is that people are desperate for reservoirs before they have been built, because they do not have enough water. As soon as you try to build a reservoir, all of a sudden people do not want it in their area. We have to come together as a country and sort this out.
Tackling Antisemitism: National Security Adviser
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Polak
To ask His Majesty’s Government, in the light of growing antisemitism and recent violence against British Jews, what assessment they have made of the role of the National Security Adviser in tackling antisemitism in the UK to protect Jewish communities.
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office, and Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (Baroness Twycross) (Lab)
I start by commending the noble Lord for his work in tackling the scourge of antisemitism. The role of the National Security Adviser is to co-ordinate security and intelligence issues of strategic importance across government and support the National Security Council. Combating antisemitism is a whole of government and a whole of society effort. This includes ensuring that national security capabilities are deployed effectively to protect Jewish communities, individuals and sites, but it cannot just be about security. That is why this Government are taking steps across education, health, culture and in the online space to go further to ensure that Jews in Britain are able to go about their day-to-day lives without fear.
Lord Polak (Con)
My Lords, the vast majority of British Jews identify as Zionists, so when Zionists are the target, most of the British Jewish community are the target. When there are anti-Israel leaflets outside Jewish schools and “Boycott Israeli Goods” stickers on ambulances in Golders Green, weeks after others were set alight, this is not protest; it is the singling out and intimidation of British Jews. Only yesterday, a woman pushing a baby in a pram in Stamford Hill was punched in the face. What is needed is not more and more money or higher and higher walls. I urge His Majesty’s Government and the National Security Adviser to take a good look at their policies in the Department for Business, Science, Innovation and Trade and, specifically, in the FCDO and examine how they are adding to the problem.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
There is no place for antisemitism in this country, and this Government will do everything we can to tackle it. I would add to what I said previously only by saying that British Jews should not be held to account for actions by the Israeli Government. We will do whatever we can, and I know that Jonathan Powell will do whatever he can, to tackle antisemitism in this country.
Lord Grocott (Lab)
My Lords, in agreeing strongly with my noble friend’s response to this Question on antisemitism, for the record can I get it clear, because there is a lot of loose language around this, that to support strongly the establishment of a Palestinian state is not antisemitic, to criticise the current Government in Israel is not antisemitic and to condemn as loathsome the views of one or two members of the current Israeli Government towards Palestinians is not antisemitic either?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
That is also true, and I agree with my noble friend on that point.
Lord Pannick (CB)
My Lords, may I express agreement with what the noble Lord, Lord Grocott, said? Does the Minister agree that combating antisemitism is the responsibility of not just the Government but all responsible political parties? Does she also agree that we should celebrate the extraordinary contribution of the Jewish community to this country in science, the arts, business and the law—although, on sport, perhaps not so much? The Jewish community should not be defined by antisemitism.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I absolutely agree with the noble Lord on that point; he expressed it better than I could.
Lord in Waiting/Government Whip (Lord Katz) (Lab)
My Lords, we have plenty of time. It is the turn of the Liberal Democrat Benches.
Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (LD)
My Lords, I believe that the previous speaker made the big mistake—I hope that the Minister will comment on this—of conflating what is happening in Israel and the Palestinian territories, with what is happening in the UK. In the UK, we are plagued by increasing antisemitism. Can the Minister assure the House that the National Security Adviser is not overinfluenced by the comments that his wife has made in national newspapers this week?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
The views to which the noble Lord alludes are held by an individual who does not represent this Government in any capacity. As the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government said earlier today, the person concerned is the wife of the National Security Adviser, not the National Security Adviser. In political discourse, it is important to maintain a distinction between government employees and their families.
Lord Callanan (Con)
My Lords, the Campaign Against Antisemitism has expressed serious concerns about the public comments of Sarah Helm, the wife of the National Security Adviser, to whom the Minister just referred. The Government have said, quite rightly, that Sarah Helm does not represent them. However, in a post during a public exchange on X last night, in response to the question of whether her husband was involved in the decision to proscribe Palestine Action, Sarah Helm denied it and said, “Nope”. Can the Minister tell the House how Ms Helm knew whether her husband was involved? None of us knows who in government was involved in that decision. How does she know who was involved?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
It was the Government’s decision, and the Government’s position on Palestine Action is clear. The Court of Appeal found that Palestine Action carried out acts of terrorism, celebrated those who took part in them and promoted the use of violence. The proscription of Palestine Action does not affect lawful protest. The Government’s position on Palestine Action is clear, Parliament has decided that it should be proscribed and we continue to hold that view.
Lord Austin of Dudley (Non-Afl)
My Lords, it is of course possible to criticise Israel, its Government and its policies without being antisemitic. However, if Israel is held up to standards that are not applied to other countries and is singled out for criticism that is not made of other countries, and if the only country against which you campaign happens to be the only Jewish one, please do not tell me that you are not an antisemite. I have to say this as well: Parliament’s obsessive focus on Israel, with the constant and false allegations made against Israel and its conduct, is driving antisemitism in the UK. Every party in Parliament needs to consider this very carefully.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
This Government remain supportive of a two-state solution and maintain the right of Israel to exist. One can hold two views, I think: we can have legitimate criticism of the Israeli Government alongside supporting the country’s right to exist.
Lord Katz (Lab)
My Lords, we still have time for questions from more than one Bench. We will go to the Labour Benches first.
Lord Mann (Lab)
My Lords, following my letter to the new Prime Minister outlining some serious issues with the security and well-being of the Jewish community, I was delighted to hear that last week, for the first time in our history, the National Security Council was convened specifically to discuss the Government’s response to, and actions on, antisemitism. Does the Minister agree that, going forward, a cross-government response to antisemitism is crucial—not one that hides in individual departments but one where the whole of government, using the principles that the National Security Council will have met on, take forward a whole of government response?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
We have to have a whole of government response, as otherwise we cannot tackle this. I thank my noble friend for his work and his review into antisemitism and racism in the NHS and the healthcare system. We are expecting the findings of Sir David Bell’s independent review into antisemitism in schools and colleges shortly. Unless we look at and tackle antisemitism wherever it is found and wherever it manifests its ugly head, we will not tackle it effectively. This will definitely require an all-government, whole of government approach.
Baroness Ludford (LD)
My Lords, I would normally resist making spouses responsible for each other’s pronouncements, but this situation is worrying for a highly sensitive position. If vetting for the post of National Security Adviser encompasses the family and household, were Sarah Helm’s posts ignored or were they accepted as okay?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
As I stated previously, the views are held by an individual who does not represent the Government in any capacity. I can only repeat that again to the noble Baroness.
Lord Grade of Yarmouth (Con)
My Lords, while there is still time, would the Minister welcome an intervention at this point from representatives of the Green Party?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
That is a matter for the noble Baroness, Lady Jones. It is not up to me to say who should ask me questions.
Lord Bird (CB)
My Lords, can I ask a very simple question? It is 82 years since they first opened the camps that showed the abysmal way in which 6 million Jewish people were treated, yet 82 years later we are having a rise in antisemitism. Can we not have an analysis of why this is happening? All I find is people saying, “Yes, it’s going up”. Where is it coming from? Why is it that I talk to hundreds of young people who say, “I am not an antisemite. I am an anti-imperialist”. Where is this coming from?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I respect the noble Lord’s views. This Government will look at where the antisemitism is coming from and how best we can tackle it. I would say that we can best tackle it with a cross-government approach, but we also definitely need a cross-party approach to tackling the scourge of antisemitism.
The Lord Bishop of Norwich
My Lords, like many on these Benches, I am deeply concerned by the rise of antisemitism, hate crime and violence in this country. Following the publication of MI5’s recent domestic threat update, it was deeply concerning to hear that the security services have dealt with so many individuals seeking to carry out attacks against synagogues, mosques and other faith buildings. I thank His Majesty’s Government for the places of worship protective security scheme. However, has any assessment been made by His Majesty’s Government of whether this provision is enough, given the current level of threat?
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
We will always look at what more we need to do. As the right reverend Prelate will be aware, the Home Office is committing a considerable amount of money to the Jewish community protective security fund. We are clear that we need to follow what the noble Lord, Lord Macdonald, said and review public order and hate crime legislation to make sure that we both protect but also prosecute where appropriate.
Lord Moore of Etchingham (Non-Afl)
My Lords, may I ask the Minister a point arising from what the noble Lord, Lord Polak, said about how the word Zionism is used as a sort of cover? It would help your Lordships’ House and the country if the Minister would explain how the Government define Zionism.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I think we would define it as the right for Jews to have their own homeland. We are really supportive of the two-state solution. At times that looks like it is an impossible goal, but we remain committed to a two-state solution and the right of Jewish people to their homeland.
Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (LD)
My Lords, to pick up on a point that I spoke to the noble Lord, Lord Polak, about outside, often people who hate one minority community also hate another. In my case, we said that people who hate us probably hate us both. But can I actually raise a point with the Minister around a loophole that we see often used by councillors who make comments and are then referred to standards boards? It is often referred to as something they did in their capacity outside being a councillor. I am sorry, but if people are elected to public office, we need to hold them to account for what they say. Maybe the Government need to go and look at that loophole, because too many councillors up and down this country, not just in the vile ITV investigation that we saw, are getting away with saying things that, while holding public office, they claim they said in a personal capacity.
Baroness Twycross (Lab)
I would agree with the noble Lord that people need to take responsibility for what they say. I am very happy to take his suggestion away.
Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and Information Systems) Bill
Commercial Payments Bill [HL]
Tuesday 20th October 2026
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Commercial Payments Bill [HL] 2026-27 View all Commercial Payments Bill [HL] 2026-27 Debates Read Hansard Text Amendment Paper: HL Bill 45–I Marshalled list for Report - (11 Sep 2026)
National Care Service
Armed Forces Bill
Tuesday 20th October 2026
(1 day, 8 hours ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Armed Forces Bill 2024-26 View all Armed Forces Bill 2024-26 Debates Read Hansard Text Amendment Paper: HL Bill 50–I(a) Amendments for Report (Supplementary to the Marshalled List) - (19 Oct 2026)