Lords Chamber

Wednesday 4th June 2025

(began 4 months, 3 weeks ago)

Share Debate
Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
15:08
None Portrait Oral questions: Implementing a code of practice under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

My My Lords,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, first My Lords, first oral My Lords, first oral question.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, first oral question. I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name in today's Order Paper, and I declare my interest as the legislator responsible for the
15:09
15:10
15:10
15:11
15:11
15:12
15:12
15:13
15:14
15:14
15:15
15:16
15:17
15:18
15:18
15:18
15:19
None Portrait Oral questions: Reforming environmental, social, and governance rules to ensure that they are not used by financial institutions to deny banking services, including loans, to the UK defence sector
-



**** Possible New Speaker ****

will seek to further understand the concerns motorist how the appeals process and some of the ideas that my noble friend mentioned. We are certainly looking at. Lord Sharpe of Epsom.
15:19
15:19
15:20
15:21
15:22
15:23
15:24
15:25
15:25
15:27
15:27
15:27
15:28
15:28
None Portrait Oral questions: Addressing the nutritional content, labelling and promotion of convenience foods aimed at very young children
-

Third oral question.
15:28
Baroness Merron Portrait Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)
-
-
I beg leave to ask the question standing in my name on the Order

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Paper. Good nutrition is essential to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Good nutrition is essential to our goal of raising at the healthiest generation of children. Foods of infants and young children have to meet regulations on nutrition, composition and labelling standards. More widely, we are committed to tackling the child committed to tackling the child obesity crisis and government actions, including the junk food advertising ban demonstrate the scale of our ambition, in this area.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

scale of our ambition, in this area. I think I echo the comments, oh

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I think I echo the comments, oh dear, because this issue is not new for stock in 2019, the public health, the Public Health England health, the Public Health England drew attention to the fact that drew attention to the fact that these products contain free sugars and they are not advised by the scientific advisory committee, on nutrition, or these young children. And they are also very indecently labelled. Every time the government response to this, they do what the Minister has just done and say there Minister has just done and say there are very good regulations about content and regulation.

Does the Minister agree that regulations are only as good as their enforcement. These are not being enforced. So when the government has its many conversations, with the food industry, can they please get a grip and stop these companies producing products which are making our children obese and have a rotting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

teeth. I hope the noble Lady will be pleased to know that I recognise the view that she is stating. I realise this has gone on for some time. I am grateful for her work in this area, grateful for her work in this area, including through chairing and the production of a helpful report. I do production of a helpful report. I do recognise the current situation isn't good enough. On the matter of isn't good enough. On the matter of food regulations and enforcement, what I would say is it is the responsibility of local authorities, responsibility of local authorities, responsibility of local authorities, in England, to enforce the legislation, where breaches are suspected, local authorities will liaise with businesses to clarify.

And if necessary agree the action to And if necessary agree the action to put it right. It is indeed the responsibility of individual businesses to ensure they comply with the law and that is a matter we will continue to press, as well as, we can assure the noble Lady, keep
15:31
15:31
15:32
15:33
15:34
15:34
15:35
15:36
15:37
15:37
15:39
15:39
15:39
15:40
15:40
15:41
15:42
15:43
15:43
15:44
15:44
15:46
15:46
15:47
15:48
15:49
15:50
15:53
None Portrait Private Notice Question: Detention of Alaa Abd el-Fattah
-

15:53
15:53
15:54
15:55
15:56
15:57
15:58
15:59
16:01
16:01
16:02
16:02
16:03
16:03
16:04
16:05
16:05
16:06
16:07
16:07
16:08
16:08
16:09
None Portrait Legislation: Statutory Instruments (Amendment) Bill - report stage
-

We come now to a debate committed in health committee. Health standards procedure regulations
16:10
16:10
16:10
16:12
16:12
16:13
16:14
16:16
16:17
16:18
16:19
16:20
16:20
16:21
16:22
16:22
16:23
16:23
16:24
16:25
16:26
16:26
16:27
16:28
16:28
16:29
16:30
16:30
16:31
16:31
16:32
16:33
None Portrait Legislation: Statutory Instruments (Amendment) Bill - report stage
-

Considerations of comms on the data use and access bill, Baroness Jones of Whitchurch.
16:33
Baroness Jones of Whitchurch Portrait Baroness Jones of Whitchurch (Labour)
-
-
I beg to move the Commons reason

**** Possible New Speaker ****

be now considered. The question is that the comms reason be now considered. As many of reason be now considered. As many of that opinion will say content. The that opinion will say content. The contents have it. Motion a Baroness Jones of Whitchurch.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Jones of Whitchurch. I beg to move motion aid that this house do not insist on its this house do not insist on its amendment 49 after which the Commons have disagreed for their reason 40 have disagreed for their reason 40 9G and you propose amendments 40 9H, 9G and you propose amendments 40 9H, 40 9J, 40 9K, 49 our in lieu of amendment 40 9F. I will also speak to motion A1.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to motion A1. Discussing this yesterday, we are back here today again to debate this issue of AI and copyright. Lordships will see that the Order Paper today are amendments from the government providing legislative underpinning to the commitments I made on Monday. My letter to noble Lords yesterday set out in detail what these amendments do. Alongside all else the governments have done. I hope this has helped to dispel to what the government is not compromised.

It also puts, beyond any doubt, the government's views on the issues at hand, especially the issue of transparency. The solution to these issues is what we have said all along. There is no disagreeing to our plan which is to finish the consultation processes, convened technical working groups, make a statement to the house on progress, then bring forward report setting out our proposals and our economic impact assessment of them. We give this plan legislative effect. This is consistent with our approach to hear concerns correspond to them, and move the bill forward.

I urge noble Lords across this house to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

support them. The only issue on today's Order Paper with which there is any disagreement is the question of disagreement is the question of whether this bill should mandate the future production of a draft bill. Mandate its contents and mandate it Mandate its contents and mandate it going through the pre-legislative going through the pre-legislative process. I would hope noble Lords agree with what I put in a letter to agree with what I put in a letter to them. We must not prejudge the outcome of these processes.

Despite assertions to the contrary, could assertions to the contrary, could governments should not assume what the detailed responses to its the detailed responses to its consultation will say. Our plan to consultation will say. Our plan to consult properly and finish the job carrying out the processes as they are mandated on the face of the bill and then bringing forward legislation can have confidence in, is surely the right one. A draft bill is not a plan to solve the problem.

It could have the consequence of delaying the very reforms your Lordships have called for. For these reasons, I hope noble Lords will support the amendments in my name but not continue to insist on amendment 40 9F on the Order Paper today. Before I finish, I want to address the question of doubling systems. Today, noble Lords have been presented with the question of whether to go even further than we have come so far during this, and choose whether they want the entire bill to fall if the government doesn't accept the amendments.

I sincerely hope it does not come to this. For this would mean noble Lords are willing to countenance the unprecedented, to try to collapse a bill that does nothing to weaken copyright law but which does deliver many of the elected government's manifesto commitments, a data process, new offences for intimate image deep fake abuse, smart data schemes like open banking that businesses have been crying out for, and a framework for research into online safety. To try and collapse of bill that the elected government is using to grow the economy by £10 billion.

The number one mission from its manifesto and election campaign to try to collapse a bill which makes vital uncontroversial, unnecessary laws, and our policing laws to keep them safe. To try to collapse a bill that will save 140,000 hours of NHS time per year with the potential to reduce medication errors by 6.8 million and to prevent 20 deaths per year. To try to collapse a bill that the elected House has voted overwhelmingly in favour of four times. I urge noble Lords to choose instead to the government's plan to solve this issue and vote with the government today.

I beg to me.
16:38
16:39
Baroness Kidron Portrait Baroness Kidron (Crossbench)
-
-
be here and to have to make this argument again. I will make just four points and then I will listen to the house and listen to the noble Lady the Minister. First, it is not fair, not reasonable, not just, balanced, or any other such word to stand in the way of the creative industries, identifying those who are taking their work and their property. It is not neutral but aiding and abetting what we have called in the house widespread theft.

We have asked privately and repeatedly on the floor of both houses, what is the government going to do to stop the work of creatives being stolen right now? The answer being stolen right now? The answer is nothing. Nothing. Second, the government may be new, but his Lordships house is full of people with long political histories. And they see in the consultation time and delay, in working groups, statements to Parliament, time and delay. Inaction is a powerful tool in politics.

In opposition, Labour wrote a manifesto for the creative industries that it took into the election with a raft of promises including to support, maintain, and promote the U.K.'s strong copyright regime, stating that the success of British creative industries to date is thanks in part to our copyright framework. And yet we are struggling to get the government to act on that promise. Or to act on that knowledge. The government is aware of this dealing. The government is aware of this law.

The government is aware the creative work morally and financially belongs to its creator. Government is aware that the success of creative industries depends in
16:42
None Portrait Amendment: A1 Baroness Kidron (Crossbench)
-

large part on the copyright regime, and the government is aware that mass theft is breaking the press. Rich businesses and hampering Rich businesses and hampering Rich businesses and hampering community. Inaction is not neutral. It is hurting our community and it is hurting the government's future is hurting the government's future prosperity. All noble Lords are concerned about the primacy of the concerned about the primacy of the Commons. Including me. We are being accused of constitutional wrongdoing.

I was very disappointed wrongdoing. I was very disappointed in the noble Ladies opening speech. We are not trying to collapse the bill. It's a starter. Should we vote, we will not be double insisting. That is entirely 100% in the hands of the Commons. Even though we have been here several times, largely because the Commons evokes financial privilege twice at a very low bar, today is the first time the house would be insisting on any of its amendments.

A point made by many noble Lords who have been in the house a great deal longer than I the house a great deal longer than I have. Were we to send the bill back for Commons consideration today, the other place would have three choices. They can choose to accept the amendment. They could choose to replace it with their own amendment in lieu. Or they could choose to double insist and crush the bill. And I want to make absolutely clear that whatever transpires today, I will accept the choice that the government makes.

This is our last chance to provide a meaningful solution, and it will be in their hands alone to provide one. Yesterday, conservative and liberal colleagues voted for this amendment enthusiastically on the basis ask for that. The government told me in advance of our debate that they would overturn it, and indeed, they did in 38 minutes. I thank the opposition benches in the other place, many of whom have written to us this morning expressing support and hope that the noble Lords will keep going.

And I thank colleagues across his Lordships house for their extraordinary support throughout. And I also want to thank again Labour colleagues who have sat on their hands and occasionally come through the lobby with us. I know it through the lobby with us. I know it is hard. I know. But my Lords, it is the role of his Lordships house to ask the government to think again, and it is both against convention and a rebuke to the house, a rebuke to the true feelings of its own backbenchers.

A rebuke to 126 A rebuke to 126 billion industrial sectors. And a rebuke to the 2.4 million creative workers to return again and again and again with no Unless this is a test that deal with big tech it makes no sense to refuse to take the power, just in case. To refuse to create a timeline or a legislative vehicle for transparency, on the half of our second biggest industrial sector, when they are crying out for our support. The very support that Labour promised.

Ministers have not been entirely straightforward with their assurances, because in the three or more years that it will take them to weaken the copyright law, to benefit AI companies, that they newly claim is not fit for purpose, they are forcing the sector to bleed wealth and jobs. And I am struggling to stand by and let that happen. My Lords, the creative industries are grateful to your Lordships' House and I am proud to be among the many noble Lords who have acted on principle and not have acted on principle and not party lines.

It is the government who have refused to meet convention and fight a compromise. Fourth and and fight a compromise. Fourth and finally, what is at stake is the basic and simple that creators owe their creations and no amount of obstacle agent can hide it. This is about how working people and UK businesses protect themselves from businesses protect themselves from theft, two and an honest wage. There is no moral, no economic, no political argument against this principle. And despite giving assurances in every argument that noble Lords are members of the other place of offered, government had hidden behind procedure and they have failed to act, to protect those workers and those businesses.

Government is about action, not blandishments. And if they cannot exceed to any of the amendments we have presented the enable copywriters to own their own property, then they are knowingly pushing the creative sector into crisis. I said I will listen to noble Lords and I will. I will. Should the Government prevail, it will be a catastrophic day for creative industries and a catastrophic error of judgement. Private property is not theirs to give away and the so-called Kidron amendments are not my amendments, but a clarion cry, from the creative and UK AI industries, for government protection, from a handful of very powerful companies that are stealing their property, their wages, their pensions, their maternity holiday and sick pay.

They were asked, the government were asked to offer a lifeline but they have chosen to turn the most modest amendment into a political crisis, by refusing to compromise. And I ask the House to consider whose interest does this in action in a fit? Ministers agree creative sector is precious, they agree it is being robbed, they agreed the world is better with the music and the arts. And it is a love Kate Bush, Shakespeare and Coldplay, but they are frustrating many attempts to give this a generation of artists a tool, to defend themselves and to defend the next generation of artists.

I am asking one last time, for the government to offer the House and the creative industries timeline and a vehicle by which they can protect their investments and livelihood. It doesn't have to be this way. Failing to act denies the U.K.'s second biggest sector affecting right to own and control their own property and in denying them that basic human right, it put the creative industries on a path of direct conflict, with its elected representatives.

That is not something that I wish to see, I beg to move.
16:50
16:50
Lord Russell of Liverpool Portrait Lord Russell of Liverpool (Crossbench)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

that motion A-1 be agreed to. May I rise very briefly. I rose very briefly to make two points. The very briefly to make two points. The first is to perhaps allay some fears noble colleagues may have about the noble colleagues may have about the constitutional propriety of where we find ourselves. For this I have to find ourselves. For this I have to thank our wonderful library. It thank our wonderful library. It turns out that in terms of this is a laws starter bill, it started in your Lordships' House.

Since 1997 there have been no less than 14 there have been no less than 14 bills, which started in the Lords, which have gone backwards and forwards ping-pong three times or forwards ping-pong three times or more. 14 bills. Two of them actually got a score of five. One got a score got a score of five. One got a score of four and 11 got a score 3. We are of four and 11 got a score 3. We are Virgin territory.

This is a tried and tested and is what happens when there are fundamental disagreements. And there is nothing unconstitutional about trying to settle a genuine agreement, in a way which gets its side to listen to each other and to come to acknowledge the other side strength of view and to come up with some sort of accommodation, which both sides can live with. We are having a problem arriving at and we are not in a state of constitutional impropriety. That is the first point I wish to make.

The second point is ready to emphasise the point of my noble friend was making, which is the urgency of this and I do have some sympathy for Her Majesty's Government, in this. I spoke briefly about this, I did try and indicate that the background of the dilemma that I government finds itself in. I have a lot of sympathy for that. Under the previous government you may recall, our penultimate Prime Minister was a great fan of AI and made a great claim trying to attract interest in AI and positioning the UK potentially as a major base, outside the US of the AI sector.

And the new government has really continued on that theme and has recognised AI as a core element, in one of its many missions were gross. But, if you listen to where the US is coming from, their position is a very, very clear and it is a deeply, deeply uncomfortable, for us. And I will actually quote what a Vice President Vance said on February 11, of this year, at the artificial intelligence action Summit, in Paris. These are quotes.

"With the President's recent Executive order on AI, we are developing an AI action plan, that avoids and overly precautionary regulatory regime while ensuring that all Americans benefit from the technology and its transformative potential. Now, we invite your countries to work with those and to follow that model, if it makes sense for your nations. However, the Trump administration is troubled by reports that some foreign governments are considering tightening the screws on US tech companies, with international funding.

America cannot and will not accept that. And we think it is a terrible mistake not just for the United States of America but for your own countries. What could be clearer than that? And then briefly this is what open AI, one of the major companies involved in the said. It says that America needs a global strategy that adopts American AI systems, not anybody else's and the copyright strategy that protects the interests of content creators and preserves American AI models to learn from copyrighted material.

And it said after the consultation, " The UK has a rare opportunity to cement itself, it makes one think of it being in cement under a bridge. To cement itself as the AI capital of Europe, by making choices that avoid policy uncertainty, foster innovation and drive economic growth. The company said, calling for a broad copyright exemption. Google said rights holders can already effectively exercise choice and control. Suggested those who opted out of AI training would not necessarily have a right to renumeration if they still appear on the models training data.

Basically we have stolen it, but too bad. Again we believe training on the open web must be free and it warned that excessive transparency requirements would hinder AI permanent and impact the U.K.'s competitiveness in the space. This is the very uncomfortable dilemma we are in. I personally would welcome transparency by Her Majesty's Government to share with us the fact that we are in an uncomfortable place and that we all need to work together to find old solution that together to find old solution that is in the best interest of our country, our creative sector.

We also need to come to an accommodation with the US of America. But on the basis of the last two months, since freedom day, one day after April Fools' Day, we are in dangerous territory. I think we need to be honest with one another. another.
16:57
Lord Baker of Dorking Portrait Lord Baker of Dorking (Conservative)
-
-
I congratulate the noble Baroness, for her determination and consistency in promoting this cause. It is very worthwhile and as she says, she really is that the spokesperson for at least 2.5 million people who constitute the cultural history of our country. What I find rather extraordinary about this government is it has sought to turn huge numbers of people sharply against it. First they turned the pensioners against them, then they turn on the farmers, now they are turning upon the creators of our culture which are very much larger than the farmers.

This is measured tonight, it is passed tonight, to the Cabinet of the Prime Minister. Must begin to realise that managing to turn all of these groups into enemies. How much how many are actually supporting in 2029. This has political implications. There is no doubt that the whole cultural world of our country. It is not just the rights of the composers and painters as well. Feel that they would have their livelihood severely limited, if not eliminated by it. That goes for the not only famous writers last Thursday.

Anthony, a leading sculpture, some would say he's a genius. He said it was our duty to defend the moral integrity. I would say that to the Minister. I hope she also believes in what she said, to defend the model integrity. That is what this bill does, because once you remove the protection of royalty, then you make it very easy. royalty, then you make it very easy. Could I say it will also enhance criminality, because anybody, a garage in Wolverhampton, asking a ChatGPT, or AI, all Microsoft, to create a picture by a great painter.

And then they could sell it. And only if the painter is alive and said well I never painted it, would they be able to stop it. And in fact, I think what I would ask the Minister to appreciate is that I know she listens to the impressions from the big American companies. I draw attention to comments in the financial Times today about someone who is described as the godfather of AI, Canadian. His name is Joshua. He said there are all sorts of people experimenting in AI and trying to find a way of how they can accommodate it, how they can protect themselves from it.

Also benefit from this. I am very scared by recent events because we do not want to create competitive human beings on the planet. Especially if they are smarter than us. That is of course the danger of AI. Particularly in the cremated world. Once the creators of lost control of their loyalties, what are they going to depend upon? Many will suffer financially by this bill. There is And last week, I think I already mentioned, our famous sculptor, some would say he is a genius, said on the today program it is the duty to defend the moral indignity of our creators and that is the heart of the amendments that the baroness has moved, and I hope that they will therefore consider that this is not only a bad bill, it has been done far too quickly.

Normally under this negotiation we have consultation before we get to report stage but the Minister says no, they are now consulting everywhere on the impacts of this measure, and so in fact I would say that it is entirely the wrong way to behave and I hope we will send it back to the Commons later tonight.
17:01
Baroness Benjamin Portrait Baroness Benjamin (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
Is many have said in this House I will accept nothing less than a compromise, but it seems that this Government is refusing to act upon the wisdom, knowledge, and the experience of this House. My Lords, my heart is broken to think that the Government could be so irresponsible and not see the damage that is being done to our creative industries, and I declare an interest as per the register. Let me tell you personal story which happened to me the other day.

I was in the supermarket discussing, with my husband, which apples to buy when a woman nearby said, " I recognise that voice anywhere, you are flow well. I am one of your babies. " I smiled, happily posed for a selfie and give her my autograph, but it made me realise that my voice linked to my character, my legacy, and also is an asset. This is the perfect example of how many people in my creative industry rely on their voices to earn a living.

The deed concerned is that AI models can represent a voice or distinctive vocal style almost perfectly and use it in an advert or voice-over without their knowledge, permission, or payment, without care or moral conscience in such a cavalier fashion. This is why people in the creative industries are so frightened about the consequences of an AI free for all, where transparency and copyright law is non-existent. So, my Lords, I once again rise to support the intrepid Baroness Kidron and stand shoulder to shoulder with her to be sure that we keep fighting to prevent the livelihoods of thousands of thousands of people being stolen.

Then I flood. Yes, it is a shame we have to be involved in ping-pong in this way, but I am doing so because at the end of the day I cannot face my friends and colleagues in the creative industries knowing that I did not do the right thing and make a stand. I could look them in the INC, like many other noble Lords across this House, I stood up for you in the future of your creative industries, for the benefits of our children's future as I have always done, as they will be excluded from actually being part of the creative industries as we know it, forging out a career in this exciting, adventurous, creative, highly respected world.

I do not see this as a party political matter, and I believe in years to come we will suffer the consequences of this error of judgement and the mental anguish it has caused. In my 15 years in this House, I have experienced many occasions when I have been assured by Ministers that we will make changes later, only to realise later never comes. So we are standing up for the creative industries and their fight for survival and fairness now not later.

And I urge all members of this House to show strength, support, and stand together with Baroness Kidron and send a clear message to the Government that we are not accepting this on our watch. The creative

**** Possible New Speaker ****

saved. I am yet to vote with the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I am yet to vote with the Government on this issue, but we all own a great debt of gratitude to the Baroness Kidron for next year's
17:06
Lord Knight of Weymouth Portrait Lord Knight of Weymouth (Labour)
-
-
Baroness Kidron for next year's champion interests of the creative sector against the daylight robbery of their rights by big tech to train their models which she has given another very powerful speech on today, but I have decided that today I will support the Government to the disappointment of my friends alongside me here, and for three reasons. First, and I accept we are not there yet, but we are perilously close to losing an important bill that is needed to support data adequacy within the European Union, to give coroners access to social media companies data, and to secure the offences relating to deep fake porn championed by the noble Baroness award.

Secondly, constitutionally, I think it is now time to listen to the elected house on a bill that has, more or less, been through the Commons three times and this has twice and was a manifesto commitment, and, thirdly, because we now have some modest movement from Government in their amendment reflecting more urgency and a commitment to comprehensively dealing with the issues of AI and copyright together. This issue has been appallingly dealt with by the Government and not referring to my Noble Friend minister because some things are out of her hands, but as a result of this I do hope that the Government now understands this House better, that it understands the passion and the power of the creative sector better and that it delivers on its promises to legislate on the issues of AI and copyright comprehensively as quickly as possible, based on the need for transparency, and on that I will work with anybody else to hold their feet to the fire.
17:08
Lord Berkeley of Knighton Portrait Lord Berkeley of Knighton (Crossbench)
-
-
Noble Lord just misses one or two points, Baroness Kidron, my Noble Friend made it clear that this is her last stand, so nobody is suggesting the noble Lords are going to try to defeat the bill, indeed I do not think any of us would want to do that. The Government have said that there is no change to copyright law. I think that is correct, and that the copyright law will be upheld. So far so good. But if we cannot see how copyright is being transgressed, how can we enforce the law? How can we take people to court? To get back our royalties.

I should mention my interest, as listed in the register. In order, it would seem, to appease the American big tech companies and quite possibly President Trump himself, it would seem that what we have actually done is locked the front door of our creative mansion, but left the back door wide open. And that is why, in a nutshell, the creative industries are up in arms. It is why I will support the noble Baroness should she decide it was to seek the opinion of the House, and I will support her on behalf of all those writers, artists, and musicians who stand to lose out through this lack of transparency.

Let me tell you that I know many composers, writers, painters, filmmakers, who earn a pittance from copyright. Two or three pounds, £100, but however small it is, it is an acknowledgement that they created something and that intellectual belongs to them, and it should be rewarded. rewarded.
17:10
17:12
17:14
17:15
Lord Brennan of Canton Portrait Lord Brennan of Canton (Labour)
-
-
I supported Baroness Kidron in her amendments but I think we reached a very difficult juncture today, as a former member of the elected House, and I think in insisting on an amendment, which we all know and agree is actually inadequate, modest, moderate amendment nevertheless one that would not do the job that we would like to see done. Guarantee the transparency needed in order to protect copyright into the future. And I find as a member of the elected House despite agreeing entirely the argument is made, very difficult to walk through the lobby and the elected House which I was a member of 43 years, has clearly rejected the proposal that we are now considering again today to send back to the House.

In saying that, I want to say to the government that I hope that it has listened intently to the debates that we have had in this House and all the points that have been raised. I hope it's aware of the emergency that we are describing in this House. I went this morning, as I did yesterday, to visit and have a look at the conference taking place up in Shoreditch in north London and if you go through the Tube station at Old Street you will be, you will encounter a number of advertisements for AI companies, with the slogan, " stop hiring humans".

That's the slogan on there. A member of the slogan on there. A member of the Labour Party. And for us, one of the reasons Wrightsville is because we believe in the dignity of labour and the import is that people should be rewarded for their labour -- rights Bill. I want the government to think, when it's engaging with these companies, who are we getting into bed with? On some of these occasions? Who are the people we are perhaps unnecessarily favouring and giving privileged access to government? And what are the intentions for the future of labour and of the workforce? And of pay and conditions and of dignity of people in work and the right for them to protect their intellectual property.

What's happening right now, for example in the music industry, last weekend four major record labels announced they are in negotiations, or rather it was revealed, they are in negotiations with apps like one I have on my phone that will generate for you, it doesn't create anything, it's a desiccated coagulated machine but it will generate for you piece of music within 30 seconds that is a simile of human creativity. It's not very good but it is astonishing at the same time, as a piece of technology.

What will happen is the major labels will go into negotiations, they would have had a stronger hand actually in some ways if the government could have found its way to support the amendments Baroness Kidron put forward. They will properly come to a deal where they will agree some kind of licence, it won't be a very lucrative one because the power at the moment is week. In exchange they will try to take a bit of equity in those businesses. The people who will be left out of the room, as usual, will be the creators.

The big labels will be in there. Lucy and -- Lucy and Grainger will be in there, who plays himself more than every singer-songwriter in this country, as head of universal. Equity will not be represented, the writers killed in there. The representatives -- the writers won't be represented in there. As usual the deal that is down will favour those people who have control over some of those rights and will use, will leave out if you like the creators from those, IH the government out of all of this, out of the what's come of this, to make use of the thing that's created, it came out of a bill introduced in the other place, in the last Parliament, namely the intellectual property office, the creators roundtable has been created by this government and which I give credit to the Minister for taking very seriously and pushing people how to make sure creators are remunerated.

I urge the government to make use of that and to make sure that they insist that creators are represented in these discussions and in these talks going forward and that the use all the leverage they can to ensure that that happens. Taking on board what Baroness Benjamin said, I completely agree with her about what she said about her voice. We should introduce new rights, actually, for creators. It's not original but I always call them vinyl rights, voice, image, name and likeness, new rights for critters to ensure their voice, image, name and likeness cannot be stolen and used by others to make profit without being properly rewarded.

There is good to come out of this. Although I can't walk through the lobby with her today because I do believe that if the elected house insists that they don't accept the amendment, which I think we all agree is not a strong amendment, they haven't assisted... I will give way. Tag does he not appreciate that sending this amendment back to the elected House will for the first time give the elected House choice. Because there has been no choice for anybody in the elected house.

There has been no government amendment, and it's been yes or no. Sending this back does as Baroness Kidron says, forced choice. It can't be sent back again. And I just as someone who had done

**** Possible New Speaker ****

27 years, suffered ping-pong, but I'm sticking with Baroness Kidron today. I have enormous respect for my

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I have enormous respect for my noble friend, and find myself agreeing with him about a great agreeing with him about a great number of things. However, it could be sent back with amendment in lieu be sent back with amendment in lieu that is true, because this isn't double insistence. But I do feel and double insistence. But I do feel and always have felt in my 23 years in the other place that once the elected House has taken a view, a strong view on a particular amendment, then that should be amendment, then that should be accepted by the elected house and that is my view, even if it isn't the view of my honourable friend.

Thank you.
17:23
17:23
Lord Dobbs Portrait Lord Dobbs (Conservative)
-
-
Anita declared my interest, rather like Baroness Benjamin. It was a bookshop, a lady of a number of years scuttled to me and said, I have always wanted to meet you and tell you that I read in two pages of your book before a full fast asleep at night. -- Before I for fast asleep. I took it as a comment. Like the noble Baroness Kidron, I'm desperately sad we are where we are. This isn't just agreement about the bill, this has become a more fundamental disagreement about the rights and responsibilities of government, their right to get that legislation through, that responsible see to listen.

The government front bench insists that they are listening but not even the backbenchers believe it. In the first round of ping-pong, ministers managed to get only 125 members to vote for them, only 125. So the government sold on. But in the second round of ping-pong, the vote fell. And in the third round, on Monday, the numbers fell yet again. It was a little like watching Napoleon 's retreat. On Monday, only 116 stumbled through the drifts in the government lobby.

Which included all the officer class, on the payroll. 116. Although I see that the screws appear to be on today. And that 116 was despite, if I may say, gallant intervention by the Lord Liddle, many of us will remember that. It was a brave speech in support of the government. Indeed, it was the only speech in support of the government. From every corner, from every bench in this House, even the government was not only bent is, the plea has gone up, please listen.

-- Even from the government's own ventures. Have given us nothing but silence, the silence of the forest in winter, frozen. It's so strange. It's so unnecessary. They change their minds about semi other things, even winter for payments, but not on this. I suggest to the government, if I may, at your using up your credit in this chamber. And you cannot be surprised when the snowmelt and your weight tends to mod as it does for all governments, if the courtesies you expect from this chamber are not given as willingly as they might.

When the conventions of this House are ignored they cannot always be easily rebuilt. But ping-pong is not a game. What it is a most profound expression of the right of this House to ask the government to listen to its advice. And that advice has been given with more eloquence, with more persistence and indeed with more authority and passion than I can ever recall. It wouldn't surprise me if genre to write a new song about it. A candle in the wind.

-- It wouldn't be a surprise if Elton John wrote a strong about it. Laugh if you wish, 2.4 million people, their families and their friends, will not think it a laughing matter. I find it a great shame. I leave it to others to decide whether it is also deeply shameful.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Yesterday Conservative MPs voted proudly, in the other place...
17:28
17:29
Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay Portrait Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay (Conservative)
-
-
Yesterday in another place, Conservative MPs voted proudly for the noble Baroness Lady Kidron's amendments including my fellow members of the shadow the team and plan to do the same again if necessary. I understand the reticence but as the noble Lord Lord Russell of Liverpool pointed out this is not unprecedented and we would not be in this position if the gunmen had not wasted the first two opportunities by handing behind points of process on Financial Privilege rather than engaging with the substance of the argument -- if the government had not wasted.

The noble Baroness is right to continue to insist upon it. There are important points of principle at stake here about the protection of private property, the dignity of labour. This is not the point that would 'Kill the Bill', it's the point that asked the government to come forward the bit more compromise and a bit more respect than it has given so far. And I and proud to be a member of a revising chamber that stands up for those principles and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lord Knight said that his Government has handled this issue I Government has handled this issue I think he said appallingly. The think he said appallingly. The question I have is why and I suggest to noble Lords that the answer to that question may be expected by my Noble Friend Lord Russell and he put his finger on the point and he his finger on the point and he referred to the concern of the United States administration to United States administration to protect the interest of AI protect the interest of AI companies.

Noble Lords may know that the head of the US Copyright office the head of the US Copyright office was sacked last month the day after she published a report which she published a report which identified the importance of AI companies respecting copyright rights. And I have a question for the Minister that I hope she will answer frankly, because she said in her opening remarks that she recognised the importance of transparency. And my question is will she tell the House in the interest of transparency what weight the Government has given to the concerns of the United States Government in resisting Baroness Kidron's repeated amendments over the last few weeks.
17:32
17:33
Lord Stevenson of Balmacara Portrait Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Labour)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

this, as are many other folks. Sorry for the exchanges, I have

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sorry for the exchanges, I have not been able to participate for some time, but I hope the House will some time, but I hope the House will be aware that we are very keen on the issues we have discussed here and on a number of bills in the past of a similar nature. I have been working with the group on what's up because that is the thing to do these days last night and we had approached this which my Noble Friend Lord Knight has said and I wish him well with that.

I have only one thing to really say and that is the very fine speeches have been misinterpreted and misplayed to this House and I think she is absolutely right in asking us to look again at this, and if she is successful I think it is right and appropriate to ask the Commons to add last put forward a proposal which, I think, would be more compromised and not the same, ironically, as the amendment on ping-pong that she has been forced to run today.

The right is an amendment that was suggested some time ago and there are discussions around that that allows the Government to bring forward regulation in such measures that are required to deal with the ongoing crisis, accelerating crisis, increasingly difficult to understand increasingly difficult to understand the crisis about these rights and theft is being exercised on a grand scale. This does not have a timescale or a period of which it can be looked at, it does not rely on consultation, and it is that trust in the decision I want to be taken by this Government.

It is important to stress some of the issues raised today and I think that Lord Russell was right to reflect on that fact as well and this is not the first time the House has been faced with a difficult issue but it is the first time it has been frustrated by process and procedure, so let's have a discussion and debate on what we can do to get ourselves to a better place. I reflect work that we did where I said sitting in the office slightly unscripted I was going to be shot down if I did it that I did not want to work in opposition to the Government on a bill with no political disadvantage and wanted to use the talent, the skills, the expertise that are so often here in this House to get the best result possible and I can see Lord Parkinson nodding at that.

It was really difficult to do because the system is set up to provide opposition to anything that challenges the original bill, and I think we had long and difficult times to his own side that actually this was a debate moving forward. This is exactly the issue, there is not a huge issue between where we want to go to and the Government have a lack of flexibility that we think in the next few years will come forward at a time when it is appropriate to bring forward their transparency that everyone knows has to be there.

There are issues about copyright, it happens all the time, but the transparency is at root and I urge the Government to work with To get to a point that will allow everyone to relax if the main issue is dealt with and the program is clearly articulated which will take us forward into the next group at the appropriate time and this is

**** Possible New Speaker ****

what we need. It is a huge pleasure to follow

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the Noble Lord Stevenson. I do not want to detain you any

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I do not want to detain you any longer. I have looked through all the stages of the bill and I have
17:37
17:39
Lord Clement-Jones Portrait Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I once again declare an interest as The Chair of authors licensing collecting society and I rise once again, my Lords, to give the staunch support from these benches to the noble Baroness Kidron in proposing her motion a .1. She made an incontestable case once again with her clarion call, and I want to follow the Noble Lord Russell and others in saying that we are not in that territory and I have a treasured cartoon on my wall at home that relates to the passage long ago of the Health and Social Care Act bill back into thousand and one which shows the Secretary of State Alan Milburn recalling from ping- pong balls and guess who was hurling the ping-pong balls.

The Noble Lord, that notable revolutionary and I were engaging in rounds of parliamentary ping-pong stops three, I think, at the time. Eventually compromising and the bill received Royal assent in April 2001. So, what we have done today and what we are going to do today as a house is not unprecedented. There is strong unprecedented. There is strong precedent for all benches to work together on this tour rather good effect and as the noble Baroness Kidron says, what we are proposing today will not, in the words of the noble Baroness the Minister, collapsed the bill.

It will be the government's choice of what to do when the bill does go back to the Commons and I am afraid that I hugely respect the Noble Lord but I am afraid he is wrong, it was not a manifesto commitment. There is no Salisbury convention that can be invoked on this particular occasion and it has nothing, whatsoever, to do with data accuracy except that Government feels they have to get the bill through order to get the EU commission to start its work.

If anything, the bill makes data advocacy more difficult, and I say to that Noble Lord everything he said was an argument of the noble Baronesses amendment, and once again, as ever, I agree with the Noble Lord Stevenson as I so often do on these occasions. I regard him as the voice of reason and I very much hope that the Government will listen to what he has to say. Compromise is entirely within the gift of the Government, the Secretary of State should take a leaf out of the book of Alan Milburn at the time who did compromise on an important bill in key areas and saw this bill go through and I unafraid to say that the letter that appears have received from the noble Baroness the Minister is simply a repeat of her speech on Monday which was echoed by Minister Bryant in the Commons yesterday that the Government have tabled these new amendments which reflect the contents of that letter, but despite those amendments, the permit has not offered a contention to legislate for mandated transparency provisions within the bill which has been the core demand of the Lords amendments championed by the noble Baroness Kidron for the reasons set out in the speeches we have heard today.

Now, in view of these benches, Baroness Kidron, other members of this House, and countless creatives have made the absolutely convincing case for a transparency duty that would not prejudge the outcome of the AI and copyright consultation. We have heard the chilling points made by the Noble Lord Russell about US policy in this area around attitude, and big tech companies towards copyright. We are at a vital crossroads in how we ensure the future of our creative industries. In the face of development of AI and how it is being trained, we must take the right road before and I urge the Government to settle now, my Lords.
17:43
Viscount Camrose Portrait Viscount Camrose (Conservative)
-
-
Well, given where we are, I am going to speak very briefly, but I will make just two points. First, I think it is worth saying the uncertainty surrounding where we are with AI and copyright is, itself, damaging. Not just to the creative sector, not just to AI and big tech in general, but to all of those who themselves were impacted by the bills many other provisions. Because, overall, I do think it is worth reminding ourselves this is an important bill whose original conception did not even address AI in the copyright.

It carried very important valuable provisions as the Minister pointed out in her opening remarks on digital verification services, smart data schemes, the national underground passenger register and others, these can genuinely drive national productivity, indeed, that is why my party proposed them when we were in party proposed them when we were in Government. So it is, I find, deeply frustrating that Government have not yet found a way forward on this. And I believe I very much agree with the Noble Lord night.

The way the Government has gone about this has been reprehensible, I think is the word I would use. Now, I obviously do not know how they are going to conclude, but should the outcome go against them, I urge the Government to strain every sinew, listen to the House, work closely with the Noble Lady Baroness Kidron, and find a way to make it happen to end this chaotic period of uncertainty that helps nobody. That said, as I said on Monday as a responsible opposition, we do not wish to engage in protracted and would ultimately, simply expect the bill to be elected
17:46
Baroness Jones of Whitchurch Portrait Baroness Jones of Whitchurch, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology) (Labour)
-
-
I want to thank noble Lords for their contributions and throughout this process. Colleagues have spoken consistently with passion and eloquence as befitting the many varied and celebrated interests that noble Lords have in the creative industries. As I've said on numerous occasions, and feel I don't need to appreciate, this government is absolutely committed to the creative industries. We want them to flourish. And we have a plan to achieve this. And I'm grateful to noble Lords who took the time to read the letter that I sent to members of your Lordship's House last night which I hope sets out more clearly our approach to these important issues.

Given our debates to date on the letter, I will spur the House a repetition of our position. However, our concerns, that any legislation mandated now, whether a draft bills or Regulations, will prejudge all the work required and result in laws are not fit for purpose remains. Contrary to some of the suggestions we have heard today, government have been listening carefully throughout the passage. The government has set out a plan to deal with this issue and it includes additional compromises that respond to specific concerns raised by noble Lords in this House which have been put on the face of the bill and will be strengthened if the House supports motion A.

I agree with my noble friend Lord Brennan, of course once the workgroups get going it is vital that the creators cut creative sector have a voice in those working groups and of course that is our intention to deliver that. The next step which I know noble Lords are keen to take it simply to get on with it. The quicker this bill is passed, the sooner we can put more resources into resolving the issues that noble Lords have raised. I have to say, I agree with the noble Lord Lord Russell that we need to work together to find a solution which is appropriate for the UK, not for other countries.

Who will obviously have their own agendas. And I should also make it absolutely clear that there are no side deals in any agreement in the trade deal with the US. But unless and until we reach Royal assent, we are and by extension we are basically stuck in limbo. So we need to move on. I know noble Lords have spoken very much in support of Baroness Kidron's amendment. In Baroness Kidron herself has called for action now. But we believe the noble lady's amendment as drafted would take a long time to implement, it's intended to take effect after the proposals that we have set out in the mill.

We have heard concerns about the expediency and have tested how quickly we can pave a clear way forward, ensuring all an immense are considered in the round. And yes, I would say to enable friend Lord Brennan of Canton we are aware of the urgency of this. This is why we publish the economic impact assessment and the report the bill requires the nine months. This will ensure we are ready to act as soon as possible. What also having sufficient time to consider all views and options.

If the report on the economic impact assessment are not published within six months of the bill was not Royal assent the Secretary of State has made it clear that he will lay before Parliament a statement setting out progress towards the publication. The noble Lord Lord Berkeley asked about clarification on the situation of copyright. Let me make it clear. The government is clear copyright must be complied when copies are made to train AI models. This means licences are required for copyright owners, button some circumstances and exception may apply.

If copying takes place in other jurisdictions that country 's law will apply. The law is complex and disputed and not appropriate for us to comment on that litigation which noble Lords will know is currently before the courts. But we recognise calls for greater legal clarity and this is why we have consulted and are now developing options on the way forward. Noble Lords have raised the constitutional issue that we are dealing with today. Baroness Kidron said in her letter that the bill is unusual as it started in the Lords and if the Lords insisted the government would have to accept that the amendment, or let the bill for.

Let me make our position absolutely clear. The primacy of the House of Lords applies equally to bills that start in the Lords and in the Commons. This primacy is necessary for a democratic society, the views of MPs elected by the public should be respected in the House of Commons has expressed its view on this issue on AI and copyright twice, three times already. Passing this bill

**** Possible New Speaker ****

will also get... I would be grateful if she could clarify if Baroness Kidron's amendment is carried, it doesn't scupper the bill, it goes back to the Commons, where the Commons can provide an amendment in lieu. Therefore the ball would be in the Therefore the ball would be in the Commons court and the government lie court and it would not scupper the court and it would not scupper the Well, I think I made that point, we Well, I think I made that point, we regard the primacy of the House of regard the primacy of the House of Commons as absolute paramount.

And I Commons as absolute paramount. And I think as I have stated, at the end of the day, if we're not careful, we will get into a situation which the Baroness Nye think was beginning to raise with us, where we won't be able to accept the primacy of the House of Commons. For us, that is absolutely paramount. Passing this bill will also let us get on with delivering the other measures the bill contains. Many of which have been championed by noble Lords.

And I welcome noble Lord Viscount Camrose 's support for this. The broad support they enjoy in the... The bill has had broad support which was enjoyed in the last session, too, and that is testament to the work done by this government and the previous one on these issues and while both our party and the opposition advocated for this bill and its policies during the general election. Many noble Lords including the noble Lady Baroness Kidron have spoken on this and other debates about the good these measures will do and I'm glad to recall her on support during our second reading debate.

For the data preservation measures for Kronos to preserve data when a child dies and her wishes for the bill's swift passage to see this become law. And I agree with her, I also recall the noble Lord Clement- Jones saying this version of the bill was much improved from the last and as we have done predecessor we should be able to make good progress. These policies and the significant benefits they will bring R1 elected house has voted in favour of this bill four times, all the continuous passage, four times in a row.

They have exercised their choice. We now have to get on with the job for the bereaved parents victims of deepfake intimate image abuse, charities that want to use the soft option of use, businesses keen to benefit from the use of smart data and all the money and various benefits of the measures and festive commitments in this bill. So I urge your noble your Lordships to accept the new amendments and the bill passed into law on than moving us to the precipice where we could face collapsing it entirely.

Forcing

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the elected house to back down... Will the Minister give way? I'm

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Will the Minister give way? I'm very grateful to have fought giving very grateful to have fought giving way and I'm obviously very disturbed she says that as a potential for this bill to collapse, with all the this bill to collapse, with all the important measures within it. If the other place chooses to collapse the bill, can she tell me which cabinet minister or Kaiser will take responsibility for what is clearly responsibility for what is clearly an unprecedented legislative and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

political failure? As I keep saying, the primacy of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

As I keep saying, the primacy of the House of Lords, of the House of Commons is absolutely vital. You can Commons is absolutely vital. You can laugh about this but this is a really serious issue. This is fundamental to our democracy. I think that is a really important issue. The House of commons have made the decision clear on occasions now and is not like that the House of Lords continued to try and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

overturn that. -- It is not right. I have listened with great respect but she has stated repeatedly that we are going to deprive the country of all the other deprive the country of all the other measures in this bill which are accepted, that is not the case. It accepted, that is not the case. It is not the sorry for the bill to collapse at all, what is necessary is for the government to take some positive action and I think it will be appropriate now for her to accept that in her closing remarks and to that in her closing remarks and to agree that this, if this House votes in favour of Baroness Kidron's amendment, that the bill will not collapse.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

collapse. My Lords, as I have said, there is a danger that this bill will is a danger that this bill will collapse if the Lords continues in collapse if the Lords continues in of the House of Commons, which is absolutely fundamental to our democracy. Last I want to give my thanks to the public servant who has -- whose motives were questioned on Monday. Public servants were not able to defend themselves when attacked and they deserve our thanks.

I want to take the opportunity to recognise their long record of distinguished public service, a night time it has felt this debate has indeed brought us to the out of reason. I hope your Lordship's House will unite around our approach and the fundamental constitutional constables today by supporting motion A in money. I beg to move. -- In my name. to move. -- In my name.
17:57
Baroness Kidron Portrait Baroness Kidron (Crossbench)
-
-
My Lords, I want to... Let me first start by just reiterating something I said in my opening remarks, just to be absolutely clear to everyone who was not in the chamber at that time. If we vote on this amendment, one of three things happens. The Commons can consider the amendment and accept it. The Commons can put an amendment in Commons can put an amendment in lieu. All the or the Commons can, and it would be inexplicable, they can collapse the bill.

That is the situation. I also want to say to the house, when I said that out in my opening remarks, I also said that if we do choose to vote on this, and we do successfully pass a, I will accept anything that the Commons does. They can accept the amendment. They can put theirs in lieu. Or they can collapse the bill. But I will not stand in front of your Lordships again and press our case. I have made that utterly clear and I want that to be on the record before anybody makes up their mind about what they are going to do today.

I also want to say to my friends on the Labour benches, my friends, if I can pass by the normal... The government have not listened and the government told me before we had a debate on Monday that they would overturn the amendment. And they have attended in 36 minutes. They did not take the full hour. So I'm sorry, but the government are not listening and this whole palaver, it's not a constitutional crisis. What it is an attempt to get the convention by which this House is heard, by the other House, and they bring something back, and we compromise.

Now, I understand and I do believe in the elected chamber and the preeminence of the elected chamber. And I really want everybody to know, I have said, in fact when the Lord Speaker had me on his podcast, I went, I am a Turkiye that will vote for Christmas. So I want to say I do. Another thing I want to say before we must get on with this, and I beg your forgiveness, I was disturbed by the related minister suggesting I would do anything to undermine the whole of the bill.

It will not be my choice. And those amendments in that bill to do with bereaved parents and the coroners, were amendments in my name, and the names of other noble Lords around this place, and was the result of a similar campaign as I'm trying to do I resent that and I understand it was probably someone else that wrote the edge of reason Joe, but it is not funny, because like her, I take this very, very seriously. And I am not standing up here trying to crush a bill.

I actually worked out what the bill office that I would not be able to crush a bill before taking this move. And my final point, and I have to once again I am so delighted to see the Noble Lord Stevenson back in his place, I really want to say that this is our last chance to ask the Government to protect the property rights and wages of our citizens, because if we do not vote for this agreement then the Government cannot do the right thing.

And I said on Monday there are better amendments than this, and the Noble Lord Stevenson is correct. And I urge the Government to come back with an amendment that look smaller the one we passed a couple of weeks ago than the one we may or may not pass here. And I had a sleepless night wondering about this and what to do and I have decided that I am prepared to lose because I know there are thousands of people out there who are asking their Government, there elected Government, to stand by their property.

To stand by their livelihood. And to stand by our second most important way of building industrial sector and if we do not do that now then we know no one else is going to do it, so if that is what it means to be a Lord and to challenge I am challenging the Government to please come back with something meaningful that has a time and has a vehicle for transparency. A time and a vehicle, because the Noble Lady is right. All of those things must happen.

And I agree with her on that, but they are going to take two or three or four years. And by that time it will be too late for the creative industries, so I please ask that house to protect the rights of any person, the moral right, the financial right, to control and benefit from their own work, because in my view anything else is stealing, and I would like to seek the agreement of the House.
18:04
18:04
18:07
18:16
18:16
18:16
Viscount Hailsham Portrait Viscount Hailsham (Conservative)
-
-
Move in the amendment that stands in my name, I would like to ". I have not previously into intervened in the debate, long-standing commitments prevented me from participating both at second reading and at committee stage. But in fact is one of the disadvantages, albeit a minor one, of so-called emergency legislation introduced at short notice call. More serious disadvantages are of course the curtailment of time for reflection and a reduction in the time for consultation.

However, I have had the opportunity of studying the Hansard reports, and what was said in this House on both occasions and also what was said in the House of Commons. My main purpose today is to speak briefly to amendment one which stands in my name. And now begin by commending the admirable speech of that noble and learned Lord Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, to those of your Lordships who like myself were not present at the second reading debate. His speech was a model of levity and conciseness and I agree with everything that the noble and learned Lord said.

Lord Phillips said that he did not believe that the guidelines introduced two-tiered justice. I agree with that. He said that he did not believe that the introduction of the guidelines would severely damage confidence in our criminal justice system. I share that view. Noble and learned Lord considered that there was no need for this bill. I am of the same opinion. In my view, this legislation has been triggered by an unhappy combination of political point scoring and political back garden.

Sorting personal characteristics of an unwelcome kind albeit not within the statutory definition of this bill. Lord Phillips concluded by saying that we should reluctantly accept this bill but seek to improve it by way of amendment. And that is what I am seeking to do. The amendment that I have put down is in substance estate of principle. While in fact which reflects policy albeit because of resource constraints, not the current practice. But given the fact that we have this bill, I suggest that there is merit in framing the policy in explicit statutory and positive language.

I suspect that everyone who has experience in this field but agree that in the great majority of cases, where an offender is facing the possibility of custodial or a community sentence, it is highly desirable that the sentence should have available a properly considered presentence report. Not one which is the product of a few minutes of discussion in the cells but what is required is a considered and research presentence report by a qualified member of the Probation Service.

And that implies a Probation Service which is properly staffed and properly financed to address the required work. I deeply regret that in recent years there has been a serious decline in the number of presentence reports and I have in mind the decline of 42%, mentioned by the noble Lord Lord Bach, the second reading debate, and by others. And I acknowledge with very great regret that one of the immediate causes of this decline in the availability of proper reports was the policy of the government which I supported.

I would add to, if I may, that the existence of a properly financed and staffed the patient service is fundamental to the success of the sentencing reforms proposed. It should be self-evident that the presentence report addresses all the relevant considerations which may help the sentence to determine the appropriate sentence. That is what my amendment states explicitly. Such consideration may include the individual circumstances and the personal characteristics of an offender. And I accept that as it became apparent in the debate, especially at committee, there is a distinction between the two concepts, although there is a very high degree of overlap.

So both criteria should be included and that my amendment does the definition to be found in amendment seven. And the guidelines are there to ensure the infirmity of the practice of the courts. Obviously there is concern about the availability of resources and hence the impossibility of making reports and dietary. And it was the council's concern about the inadequacy of resources that caused the guidelines to identify specific cohorts as having priority. But drafting guidance and the positive language of my amendment does meet the expressed concerns of the critics of the guidelines.

My amendment provides for the guidelines to be general in the application and my amendment two might encourage the government to ensure that additional resources are made available to the Probation Services so that presentence reports becomes the norm in all appropriate cases. And so amending the bill in that modest way that I have proposed will, I hope, make a small contribution to the proper administration of criminal justice administration of criminal justice in this country. I beg to move.
18:23
18:23
Lord Beith Portrait Lord Beith (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I agree very much with what the noble Lord, Nigel -- noble Viscount And it gives clarity to unclear legislation. We are about to make bad law because the government has been unable or unwilling to define what personal characteristics are. We do not know what will come forward in the range of prohibitions placed on the sentencing Council. There will be left to the... And undefined scope and an undefined extent, race, religion and belief, or cultural background, whatever that is, our listed.

After that it becomes a matter for speculation, as to what might be included. The government exists is a nonexhaustive government exists is a nonexhaustive list. -- Insists it's a nonexhaustive list. Without citing any authority, the personal characteristics include sex, gender identity, age, physical disability and see, or other similar conditions. What is similar to pregnancy? I've been puzzling over this for some time. And the Minister this for some time. And the Minister did not mention autism or sexual abuse but in the latter case, the government said in a different letter that it is not a characteristic of being a victim of sexual abuse.

What is included appears to be in the minds of ministers or whatever may appear in the mind of ministers, leaving Sentencing Council and indirectly judges and magistrates, of some confusion as to what is intended. I think and hope that in court, decisions about whether or not call for a presentence report, will not be influenced by this whole row, but there is a slight risk that this may be an area which the courts start to think, this is political, we best not go there.

That must not happen. The said existing freedom of courts to make a decision to have a presentence report is not directly affected by this bill. I worry is it might have an indirect effect. The law can have consequences. I foresee a day when a nonexhaustive list of provisions will be in some other bill on some other subject. Will be then told that nonexhaustive lists are an established practice. And appeared in the Sentencing Code presentence report act from 25.

It will become, the president will get used on some future engagement and used on some future engagement and that is dangerous. My noble friends amendments restores the Sentencing Council's freedom if there is good cause to issue guidelines which refer to personal characteristics. Urged support for it and if he pressed it to a vote, you will certainly have my vote and I hope that of others who are concerned to protect the Sentencing Council to do its job in the light of, following discussion with government wherever necessary.

But I'm finally to the amendment in my name, number nine, the Minister has asserted that pregnancy is a personal characteristic, falling within the restrictions opposed by section 2 of the bill. But there is case law accepting pregnancy as a reason to order a presentence report, modern slavery was really referred to as grounds for pre-sentencing report. And being a young offender is dealt with in 22. This difficult to accept that the case law should be overridden by this bill if becomes an act.

The Minister has asserted it is overridden by asserting in his letter that the bill would make such direction about obtaining PSRs across existing guidelines unlawful. Unlawful is the word used in the letter. Nevertheless, he claims, it will not vent guidelines from mining sentences that yourselves will be necessary when an assessment of the personal circumstances ) leaves us in a tangle of uncertainty. I suggest that Mr accept my amendment, leaving the Sentencing Council free to...

On the value of importance of pre-sentences reports in cases of the kind I referred to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I confess I'm still struggling to understand this bill, despite it being only one clause. The Minister
18:28
Baroness Hamwee Portrait Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
being only one clause. The Minister was as helpful as he could be at committee and we all know his pedigree. But he has been dealt a very difficult hand. I think it's going to be bad law. We'll note the political background to it. On Monday in the debate at second reading of order security, asylum and migration bill, one noble Lord found the delicate phrase which I will repeat, presentational. That's quite a good synonym. The Constitution Committee has commented on the bill.

Picking up very much the point that the noble Viscount has made, and my noble friends. And the response from the Minister, Ministry of Justice, has not taken as any further. At committee I asked what was meant by the words "framed by reference to ". I still don't really understand them. That's caused me to table amendment three, although I realise that's a bit risky pursuing this, because we may be told from the Dispatch Box that the bill is more restrictive than we actually want to see and it's arguable that as it stands, guidelines can refer to characteristics, depending on the law which is being shaped.

The legislation should be clear and it should be certain points which were made very clearly by the Constitution Committee, and especially in the sort of situation. Curious that this bill seeks to pitch the state against a body such pitch the state against a body such I also have amendment six in this group that at times my Noble Friend was trying to understand the characteristics, but our circumstances? There is quite a grey line and of course there are factors in both, this refers to pregnancy.

I realised after I tabled the amendment that wording and assessment would be beneficial and assessment that would be suitable, that is the word used on the sentencing or appropriate which is a very good term. very good term.
18:31
Lord Garnier Portrait Lord Garnier (Conservative)
-
-
My Lords, I want to begin my remarks like my Noble Friend by apologising for not having been able to attend the earlier stages of this bill, but I am happy to say that like my Noble Friend I read the report and I'm reasonably up-to-date with the way in which the debates with the way in which the debates have gone. I rise today because I am very much attracted by what my Noble Friend said in support of his amendment one and I do so from a position of some but not a great deal of experience as a sentence.

I was a recorder of the Crown Court for 15 years I think from 1998 until about 2015 with time of in the Government and one of the things I find most useful in dealing with what I thought was the most difficult task as a judge was the advice and the help of the sentencing board. If you are a High Court judge you tend, if you are dealing with criminal, only to deal with life sentence cases, so the job that you have to do when sentencing is to consider the tariff within the life sentence, difficult but not perhaps as complicated as having to deal with the multiplicity of sentences involved in the road traffic cases, drug cases, dishonest acquisition cases and so on and cases to do with assault and other forms of violence, so as a recorder, as a Crown Court judge and as a magistrate and I say in his place one is dealing with in a sense a much more complicated sentencing picture and the assistance of the sentencing reports is huge.

And anything that this bill can do to make the life of the sentence are easier to produce a just sentence is to be welcomed and I think to my Noble Friend the suggestion through amendment one provides the sort of assistance that I would very much have wished to have had as a low- level sentence. It perhaps more neatly is encompassed in the suggestion through amendment to tabled by the Noble Lord Marks. Either way, both amendments appear to me to be trying to undo the mess that has caused the arrival of this bill.

I understand the politics that I shall be all due it is a thoroughly unnecessary bill. And given that we have got the bill I really do invite the Government to pay close attention to the speech of my Noble Friend and to listen very carefully to my colleague the Noble Lord Marks to speak to amendment to
18:35
18:37
18:39
18:42
Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames Portrait Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
My Lords, before turning to amendment to my name, I will, if I may, make a number of points that are relevant to the general difficulty of this bill, highlighted by all the amendments in this group, delivering to the in suitability of legislating as to what the Sentencing Council may or may not recommend in guidelines as to when presentence reports should or should not be required and I take the point just made by the Noble Lord that there is a distinction to be drawn between guidelines and when a sentencing, when a pre-sentencing group is to be required, but there is a real scope for confusion, and that does concern us all.

When sentencing effective judges must inevitably take into account the personal circumstances of individual offenders, alongside the nature of the offences, the requirement to punish and the need for deterrence. And when taking into account those personal circumstances, they are bound to consider their different personal characteristics, so the drafting of this bill starts, I suggest, with the conflict that is on analysis almost impossible to resolve. The Government tried to clarify what is meant by personal characteristics, in an all PR's letter just before Committee stage, in which the Noble Lord the Minister cited the words of the noble and learned Lord new burger in the House of Lords as the precursor of the Supreme Court, when he said that, and I quote, a concept or personal characteristics generally requires one to concentrate on what somebody is rather than what he is doing or what is being done to him.

That might assist the court to consider in a judicial context what words may mean, but it does not, necessarily, help with the construction of the meaning of a bill. No clear distinction can be drawn between what a person is by birth and what a person may have become by reason of life experience. For example, there is a woman pregnant because of what she is or because of what has happened to her? Is a black person scarred by racism suffering because of what they are or because what has happened to them? That difficulty is compounded by the fact that the list of personal characteristics in clause 1 113 is not exhausted.

They are said to include, in particular, race, religion, or belief and cultural background. But that does not exclude anything else. A point that has been made by my Noble Friend by others throughout the discussion of this bill. The use of the phrase framed by reference to what is also rightly criticised by my Noble Friend baroness Hamilton as hopelessly uncertain. That was in the context of proposing her amendment three, but it runs through the whole of this issue of personal characteristics.

Much of the difficulty may arise out of the brush with which this bill was introduced. The history of the disagreement between the Sentencing Council and the Lord Chancellor is well-known. We still believe that this agreement or to be sorted out without resort to emergency legislation. We say that once the council has agreed to pause the guidelines for parliamentary consideration, this bill was a consideration, this bill was a consideration, this bill was a The bill also pre-empts the careful Independent Sentencing Review led by David Cork, which would have had more of a free hand to consider proposals for the Sentencing Council had this bill not intervened.

Our principal objection to this bill is that it misguidedly seeks to tie the hands of the Sentencing Council. Its introduction followed the intervention of Robert Jenrick who argued that the new opposed guidelines advocated a system of two-tiered justice, black and ethnic minority offenders, he said, would get presentence reports, which would be likely to keep them out of prison while white people would not. But that argument ignores the overwhelming evidence that black people are more likely to go to prison and for longer than white people.

And that ethnic minorities face widespread discrimination right across the justice system. Witness the well-respected and will research report prepared by David Lammy in 2017, the other cohorts face similar disadvantage in the criminal justice system. The truth is we already have a two tier criminal justice system that is marred by inequality, and an equality of outcomes, and it was that inequality that the Sentencing Council was seeking to address with these proposed guidelines. We say that was a proper approach for them to take.

Far from undermining the principal that everyone is equal before the law in which we all believe, the proposed guidelines would have reinforced it. The amendment proposed by the Right Reverend Prelate the Bishop of Gloucester addresses the position of pregnant women and mothers in particular. As to the amendment proposed by my noble friends Lord Beith which advocates respect for existing case law. That is because as he has explained, among other things, the Court of Appeal has already made it clear that presentence reports should normally presentence reports should normally be ordered when a court is to sentence a pregnant or postnatal mother.

It is entirely artificial for guidelines now to prohibit the sentencing judges from being told that is appropriate. The noble Lord Viscount Hailsham's amendment also seeks, as he explained, discussion and commonsense in the councils production of the guidelines. And nobody is suggesting that the Sentencing Council 's work is not important and that promoting consistency in sentencing is not a laudable aim. The noble Viscount's amendment would enable guidelines to permit sentencing judges to order PSRs if they regard it as likely to be relevant to the determination of the appropriate sentence.

That is a proper function of such guidelines. The noble and learned Lord Lord Garnier and the noble Lord Lord Meston with the experience of sentences pointed out how helpful presentence reports are. The point of my amendment 2 and accompanying amendment is to ensure that the prohibition on guidelines that refer to particular cohorts or personal characteristics will not apply where the council has good cause to believe that leaving such characteristics are out of account would be likely to lead to an inequality of outcomes.

So the Sentencing Council would be entitled to proposed guidelines that face the jealousy and advise judges how best to approach it. We regard that as fundamental and just and I propose to seek the opinion of the House on amendment two.
18:50
Lord Bishop of Gloucester Portrait The Lord Bishop of Gloucester (Bishops)
-
-
My Lords, I, like other noble Lords, have already registered my feelings about this bill at second reading and committee stage, and now we have had the publication of the Independent Sentencing Review and the government lie response. I will reiterate I simply don't believe, like others, that we need this piece of legislation. It seems the left hand is not aware of the right hand when it comes to evidence around sentencing. I agree with what has been said already.

My amendment number eight in my name seeks something very specific to ensure that existing sentencing relating to the mitigating factor of pregnancy, childbirth and postnatal care, can continue to provide directions through courts to obtain pre- sentencing reports for offenders who are pregnant or are primary care of young children. Without this amendment, the sentencing, presentence report will, directly contradicts the government 's stated policy intent to reduce the imprisonment of pregnant women and mothers of young children.

On 22 May, in her response to the independence and view, the Lord Chancellor explicitly stated the government's intend to reduce the imprisonment of pregnant women and mothers of young children and I quote "I am particular keen to ensure that pregnant women and mothers of young children are not anywhere near our female present estate in future ". Indeed the Independent Sentencing Review, and again I quote " agonises the harm caused by imprisoning pregnant women and believes pregnant women and new mothers should be diverted and supported in the community unless exceptional circumstances.

Cassidy must only be a last resort -- custody. " How are we to achieve this when this bill makes unlawful the existing Sentencing Council mitigating factor, pregnancy childbirth and postnatal care which came into force on first of April on first of April 2024. An direct courts to obtain PSRs for pregnant and postnatal offenders. I'm grateful to the noble Lord the Minister for writing after committee stage but extraordinarily confirming that the bill before us will render such direction about obtaining PSRs such direction about obtaining PSRs across existing sentencing.

Unlawful. I query his assumption that without direction sentences might request a PSR. This is a backward step. Simply put, without a presentence report, alternatives to custody cannot be considered by the sentencing court. Without a mandatory direction to pain a PSR, there is no way of ensuring women are diverted from custody. Without this amendment, the bill before us directly contradicts the government's stated policy intent. I do recognise the very difficult position that the Minister has been put in.

But I'm simply looking for the government to have the grace to admit this contradiction and to accept this amendment. It doesn't have to be seen as a humiliating backing down but rather a humble response to listening. I will not delay the House further. I will listen to the noble Minister's response in due course. I am minded at this point to divide the House although I might need some careful direction if other amendments passed as to where that leaves my amendment

**** Possible New Speaker ****

eight. Thank you. I wish to add a few sentences to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I wish to add a few sentences to what the Right Reverend Prelate has said. But I preface that by saying that when we built the Sentencing Council, the legislation was
18:54
Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd Portrait Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd (Crossbench)
-
-
Council, the legislation was discussed and agreed. It was clear when this bill was introduced that discussion and agreement was needed. And I find it very disappointing that we haven't been able to get together to find a satisfactory way of dealing with this legislation, other than by dropping it, I regard that now is gone. But to really do think it important that ministers appreciate what the Right Reverend Prelate has said. -- I really do think. It is plain pregnancy and maternity are characteristics.

It is plain that one ought to ensure that all judges receive the same guidance as to obtaining presentence reports, and the fact that I know that the noble Lord the Minister and the Lord Chancellor are very keen that pregnant women do not go to prison, but they are not the law. The law is laid down by this unfortunate piece of legislation, and if there's one thing we can do to ensure that it doesn't reach injustice, it is to allow the amendment that is proposed by the Right Reverend Prelate, there will be huge amount more we should do but without a consensus and without discussion between us, I do not believe we can make any improvement and that is why I content myself with this very, very narrow point.

We cannot be in a position where we can't give guidance to courts that they should get a presentence report to avoid sending pregnant women to present. sending pregnant women to present. -- To present. -- To prison. I thank all noble Lords who contributed to the bill's progress at committee stage, in particular I acknowledge the thoughtful and constructive contributions made by the noble and learned Lord of modern. We have had further contributions today, not least from the noble and learned Lord Thomas of Congress, and the Right Reverend Prelate will ship Gloucester.

-- Lord Bishop of Gloucester. Nonetheless, I wish to place on record our broad support for the principles that underpin this bill. The use of presentence reports, when applied rigorously, consistently and with due regard to the individual circumstances of the offender, is an essential part of a fair and effective justice system. They play a crucial role in informing judicial discretion, ensuring proportionality and sentencing, and helping to reduce the risk of reoffending through appropriate rehabilitative measures. We welcome the intention of the bill to strengthen and clarify the expectations around the preparation and consideration of presentence reports.

The seek to embed good practice across the system and to promote greater consistency in the courts approach to sentencing.
18:58
Lord Sandhurst Portrait Lord Sandhurst (Conservative)
-
-
courts approach to sentencing. However, while we on this side are supportive of the direction of travel, we remained mindful of the fact that sentencing is a complex fact that sentencing is a complex and sensitive area of the law. It touches not only on legal principle touches not only on legal principle but on human lives, social outcomes, and the effective operation of our and the effective operation of our Prison and Probation Service to. In that context, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge the specific concern that was raised by noble Lords during the committee stage.

The lack of clarity surrounding the term personal characteristics as it term personal characteristics as it appears in the bill. This is not a small point. If the legislation is small point. If the legislation is to provide clear and workable guidance to practitioners, including report writers and the judiciary, we must be precise about what we mean. Any doubt or uncertainty in this area risks inconsistent application. It undermines the very consistency that this bill seeks to promote. I hope the government will reflect carefully on these concerns, consider whether further definition could be usefully provided.

More broadly, I would echo the views expressed at earlier stages with just a little more time and careful consideration, we could strengthen and improve this legislation further. There remain questions that would benefit from additional scrutiny and we should proceed with care. We must get this right. Not only in the interests of justice but for the confidence the public, the judiciary and those working on the frontline of our criminal justice system. My Lords, we on these benches remain committed to working constructively with the government with noble Lords across the House, and with all those who bring experience and insight to bear on this important issue.

I will turn just briefly to the amendments in group 1. As for the amendment one and seven, moved by the, by my noble friend Viscount Hailsham, we recognise this amendment seeks to provide clarity about the range of matters which the sentence at my take into account and we invite the government to consider these during government to consider these during As for the amendment moved by Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames, we believe that this and amendment four is a move in the wrong direction.

We have the similar view in respect of amendment three moved by Baroness Hamwee. Moving to paragraph 6, I have nothing more to add about that. As for the Lord Bishop of Gloucester's amendment, the Right Reverend Prelate we see merit in the view that was expressed by the constitution Committee. We note that in Grand Committee the Minister clarified or sought to clarify the matter stating the bill does not affect court of appeal case law that governs the types of cases where presentence reports are necessary or desirable including pregnant women and those who have recently given birth, young defendants and vulnerable defendants and went on to make other observations.

We agree with those, but we think in the light of what has been said today in particular it would be helpful for the government to give further thought to this when it leaves this House. As for Lord Beith amendment, we are unsure exactly if it is needed but we see merit again in the view expressed by the constitution Committee. Committee.
19:02
Lord Timpson Portrait Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)
-
-
I'm grateful to noble Lords for their continued and careful consideration of this bill. Before I turn to each amendment, I want to briefly recap why we have bought the bill forward and revising the guidelines, there was text that suggested a presentence report would normally be considered necessary if the defendant belongs to certain cohorts, including those that refer to characteristics such as those from an ethnic minority, cultural minority or faith minority community we believe the approach taken will see risk offenders of presentence reports based on personal characteristics.

It also means the sentencing Council is making policy on who should get the report when this is properly a matter for ministers and Parliament to decide. For these reasons, we introduced this bill to stop the guidance coming into force and stop the sentencing Council making this decision in the future. Turning to the amendment, there are those that seek to give the sentencing Council more discretion to include factors based on offenders different personal characteristics. Lord Hailsham's amendment, one of seven, with contributions by Lord Garnier and Lord Parmenter sees the sentencing Council make guidelines to personal characteristics but only if the guidelines also said that those personal characteristics had to be relevant to the ultimate sentencing decision.

Amendment 2-4 gives the inclusion of factors based on characteristics and guidelines if they felt that doing so would avoid inequality in sentencing outcome. Amendment nine from Lord Beith intended to provide the sentencing Council from including provision within relevant guidelines that reflect existing case law about existing reports. During Committee stage, we are committed to take away concerns expressed by noble Lords on the current approach. I have carefully reflected on alternative ways to meet the fundamental objective, to ensure equality before the law.

Ultimately, I remain confident the current approach taken is the best and clearest way of meeting this objective. This is because if these amendments were implemented, they would increase guidelines with presentence reports. guidelines with presentence reports. In doing so, they place a policy in Parliament and we do not believe this is beneficial as it would undermine the bill objective. Turning to Baroness Hamwee and her amendment, amendment three changes some of the drafting used in clause 1 of the bill, stating that the sentencing guidelines of presentence reports may not include provision framed by reference to defendant personal characteristics, instead if the noble Baroness saw it accepted, the provision which is solely based on personal characteristics cannot be included in relevant guidelines.

The amendment six seeks to add text to the bill to ensure that it does not prevent the sentencing Council from producing relevant guidelines and suggests a presentence report be ordered where an assessment of offender personal circumstances will be beneficial to the court. I have no doubt the noble Baroness suggested these amendments in the spirit of making this bill is clear as possible and I'm grateful for the challenge, and I have considered both amendments and we ultimately believe they will not improve drafting.

For amendment three, this is because the bill is sufficiently clear, the drafting that prevents the sentencing Council making guidelines of the report framed by reference to different personal characteristics means the council cannot include any text within relevant guidelines refers to personal characteristics and effectively captures our intent to ensure equality before the law. For amendment six, the build as drafted does not prevent the sentencing Council from including text within relevant guidelines that suggests sentences in general terms that a presentence should be sought when the personal circumstances will be beneficial to the court.

It is clear throughout the debate and in supporting material the benefits of presentence reports and we believe our intention is clear from the language we used in the bill. In the spirit of keeping the bill short and simple, we do not consider it necessary to state things in the bill that it does not do. The bill does not prevent sentencing guidelines from encouraging presentence report based on personal circumstances. Turning to amendment 80 tabled by the Bishop of Gloucester, this amendment seeks to ensure sentencing guidelines continued to provide sentences to sentence report in cases involving offenders while pregnant or are primary carers of young children.

I would like to say I thank the Right Reverend Prelate for raising this point and I advocate better support for pregnant women in prison and those who are primary carers of young children ever since I sat out of HMP style taking foster children to see mothers on visits. I know so many foster children I live with have mothers in prison often victims of considerable trauma and abuse and often vulnerable, addicted and mentally ill. Many found imprisonment had life changing impact for them and their children.

Around two thirds of female offenders sentenced to custody received short sentences and around the same number of victims of domestic abuse. I proudly chair a women's justice board set up last year with the aim of closing women's prisons and addressing the specific needs of the cohort. The sentencing review recommendation refers to suspended sentences reduces the number of women in prison which is an important step towards the objective. However in the context of this specific bill following Committee stage debate my further consideration is to add the exclusion of the proposed amendment allowing the sentencing Council to retain existing wording across relevant guidelines that suggest sentences request presentence reports from pregnant and postnatal offenders.

We remain satisfied with the current approach as the right one and ensure sentencing guidelines do not risk preferential access to presentence reports based on offenders personal characteristics and in doing so it prevents the sentencing Council from making policy on who should get a presentence report. To be clear, this does not mean that pregnant or postnatal women should not receive a presentence report. We want them to make their own judgement on whether to order a presentence report based on consideration of unique circumstances of individual cases.

That is why nothing in the bill stops the courts from requesting presentencing reports than it ordinarily word and includes pregnant or postnatal women as well as other individuals who may be vulnerable for a number of reasons. The key distinction is we cannot support a suggestion within the sentencing guidelines that access to presentence report should be based on offenders personal characteristics. It is for this reason we have been clear throughout the passage of the bill that this does not affect the existing obligation under section 30 of the sentencing code of court to obtain a presentence report unless considered unnecessary.

I want to re-emphasise that following the bill passage and the sentencing Council can remind in general terms the term is part of a full assessment of personal circumstances that will be beneficial. I would like to clarify even without a presentence report, alternatives to custody can be considered by the sentencing court. Presentence report I bite no means the only route -- are by no means the only route. I hope the government sentiment with regard to better support for pregnant women and primary carers in prison and our clear policy intention to reduce the number of women in prison and I encourage noble Lords to withdraw the amendment of the group.



**** Possible New Speaker ****

He has made some apparently conflicting statements in the course of correspondence. One that it would of correspondence. One that it would be unlawful for the sentencing Council to frame guidelines in a way Council to frame guidelines in a way that reflected the existing case law where pregnant women should be the subject of presentence reports, but subject of presentence reports, but he just said that the sentencing Council can ensure guidelines all statements of some time that draw attention to pre-existing case law.

My amendment was to leave the sentencing Council free to do so. sentencing Council free to do so. How can he say this would be unlawful and describe the way of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

carrying it out? These are different things and we

**** Possible New Speaker ****

These are different things and we don't want to link them. The bill intentionally deals with the sentencing Council and not the Court of Appeal and the bill was drafted and achieves the aim simply and we don't want to overcomplicate things.
19:12
19:12
19:13
19:24
19:26
None Portrait AMDT: 5 Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (Liberal Democrat)
-

officer is. However we should recognise that the demoralisation that has taken place in the that has taken place in the probation service has been very serious indeed. That has been partly serious indeed. That has been partly the effect of the ill starred changes and reorganisation initiated changes and reorganisation initiated by the previous government for the whole of the probation services. And whole of the probation services. And the later reversal, which while welcome, merely proved that the welcome, merely proved that the whole experiment was profoundly whole experiment was profoundly unsettling and damaged, damaging to the probation services as a whole.

the probation services as a whole. But the declining quality of presentence reports has been principally the result of a lack of resources allocated to the production of individual reports. A particularly in terms of time that probation offices have had to prepare them. These reports need to be thoughtful, thoroughly and individually researched, with a real assessment of the most appropriate sentences in individual cases. The reports need to consider the individual circumstances of offenders with care and offices need the time to do that.

There needs to be much more opportunity for officers carefully to consider individually suitable community sentences and to research their availability. They need to have the time and resources to consider the conditions that might be appropriately attached to such community sentences. Along with the employment and housing opportunities and risks that need to be considered in individual cases. In discussing these issues we should not lose site of the central feature -- features of sentencing hearings. Presentence reports are the only real independent sources of information for judges about the individual personal circumstances of offenders and of the possible disposals and their suitability.

Judges cannot get this assistance from speeches in mitigation by defence advocates. However well researched and argued they might be. That is primarily of course because such speeches are delivered on instructions, the instructions of the offenders, the advocates represent. And they are not therefore independent. But it is also because the probation service has an unrivalled expertise in advising judges on appropriate sentencing. Given the resources and the training the dedicated probation officers receive, they can make all the difference to sentencing and can help offenders to make their best efforts to turn their lives around.

This is not only a civilised and humanitarian outcome, interning offenders away from crime and reducing reoffending and the huge personal costs to victims and families associated with it, it brings substantial societal benefit as well. So the case for this amendment is that we need to return to the principal that once underlined presentencing reports in practice as well as in theory, and certainly in every case where the sentencing decision is between custody and community sentences. That is that the judge should have presentence reports which should be of the highest quality possible in all such cases.

During the course of the noble Lords tenure as present Minister he's made it clear that it's his ambition to bring more investment into the probation service and to increase the number of probation officers which should also improve I would add the retention of operation offices within the service and raise standards generally. For us this is a crucial issue. I am very grateful to the noble Lord for his constructive engagement with me and others during the passage of this bill.

If the noble Lord can convince us from the Dispatch Box and I am very hopeful that he will, that his ambition is also the government's ambition for the probation service and for presentence reports then I will not press my amendment to the The converse also follows and await what the noble Lord has to say in his response.
19:31
19:32
19:33
Lord Timpson Portrait Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)
-
-
Amendment five, tabled by Lord Marks would require sentencing guidelines about presentencing reports to encourage their greater use in cases where sentencing decisions are likely to include a choice between a community or custodial sentence. I'm grateful for the amendment being tabled and he is right to ask how we can encourage greater use of presentence reports and ensure we have the resource to do so. The noble Lord is making the right point, speaking about the importance of presentence reports and I'm grateful to him for the discussions we had since Committee and welcome continued engagement with him on this issue.

I hope he will not mind me giving... I hope the noble Lord will not mind me giving quite a full answer. While he raises the right question, I argue there are other levers beyond sentencing guidelines that are a better place to solve a problem. We must ensure we have a probation service properly funded and staffed and has the tools it needs to deliver. We must balance the need for sufficient and thorough presentence reports with other crucial roles the probation service plays.

We want more PSR and better plays. We want more PSR and better quality PSR. I am minded a similar amendment was tabled in Committee when I took the opportunity to set out the steps the Lord Chancellor and I are taking to improve capacity of the probation service to deliver timely, high-quality reports I further reassure on the steps we are taking to support the probation service and if noble Lords permit me I will endeavour to give a full answer of what the government is doing, first increasing staffing levels having recruited over 1000 probation officers last year and aiming to recruit 1300 this year.

Second, I'm delighted we announced a significant increase in the budget of the probation service as it will rise by over £700 million by 2028-29 representing around 45% increase by the final review of this period, a significant investment and demonstrates commitment to a vitally important service. I am sure Viscount Hailsham will agree this is needed to fund probation in a way that they can do a job they came in the service to do. I'm convinced a significant part of the answer sits with new technology.

We recently hosted a tech roundtable with industry experts to sure we are working on the best solutions. We also give noble Lords a sense of the technology and I passionate about ensuring probation officers are able to do the job they came to do, for probation as every other public service new technology has the potential to be really transformative. We are exploring the benefits of AI in a number of areas and are piloting the use of transcription and summarisation tools to reduce administrative load and developing algorithms to support decision-making and risk assessment, case prioritisation and planning.

AI-powered research is being explored to better support information gathering needed to report writing. Put forward in court writing. This has the potential to save significant administration time and improve quality allowing probation officers to focus on face-to-face time with offenders to support them for change rather than with administrative tasks. Technology can transform how probation staff bring the right information together to assess and manage offenders. We are rolling out a new service called prepare a case for sentence which links probation systems with a common platform and gives probation staff the earliest possible notice of cases listed and a new template so that reports are timely and give courts what they need.

We are investing in a complete redesign of the approach to assessment of risk, need and the strength of operation in prison. The resulting sentence and risk management plans provides a new assessment of approach and incorporate assistance research supported by the new digital services. It will reduce the resource burden for staff and ensure assessment and planning practice better support individuals achieving better rehabilitation on public protection outcomes. Noble Lords recognise the one investment in technology and vital foundations and is nothing without also supporting staff to have the right skills to spot risks and needs and communicate that to the court.

Staff have access to a wide-ranging learning and development including modules related to specific roles and skills ensuring they are well equipped to work in this setting. The better trained they are, the better PSR they will present. Probation has a dedicated court case assessment tool for line managers ensuring presentencing reports and the managing protectorate of probation can make regular inspections with an assessment of court work included as a key component of this. Furthermore, probation seeks detailed feedback from sentences on the quality of the report through an annual dude usual survey.

Through all of this improvement, our aim is whenever the court orders a presentence report, they can be confident it will be on the fullest information and a thorough analysis of risks and needs and answers the questions the court wants to understand. I recognise the amendment refers to scenarios where they will need to decide between imposing a community or stove your sentence and I agree with the noble Lord that the presentence report will be helpful in these cases. These reports provide sentences that are effective assessment of risk and targeted assessment of individual needs.

This confidently articulates suitable sentencing proposals that balance Public Protection, punishment and rehabilitation. In doing so, they will consider a range of disposal options setting out a use of credible community sentences where appropriate. I hope it will offer reassurance to the noble Lord and advise the position guideline including relevant text in this spirit which the bill does not impact. Specifically estate a presentence report can be pivotal to ensure the court decides whether to impose a custodial or community order and where relevant what particular requirement or domination of requirements are most suitable for an individual offender on a community order or a suspended custodial sentence.

It is for the sentencer to decide if they order a presentence report and there is an existing obligation to obtain a presentence report unless they consider unnecessary. This bill does not change that. I reiterate my thanks to Lord Marks for raising the importance of presentence reports and increasing their use and as I set out the government is committed to ensure greater funding capacity and efficiency of the probation service and I urge the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment. withdraw the amendment.
19:40
19:42
19:43
Lord Faulkner of Worcester Portrait Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour)
-
-
. It is my pleasure that this bill be read a second time and I stress my gratitude to the Malvern Hills trust to be presenting this bill on this behalf. I am sure you do not need me to describe the beauty of the Malvern Hills and I now live in the city of Worcester and for much of my life I have lived in it most of my life or in the villages close by. They stretch across the borders of Herefordshire and Worcestershire.

The highest point is the Worcestershire beacon at 1394 feet. The hills are dedicated as a national landscape, formerly known as an area of outstanding natural beauty. 62% of the hills are assigned to special scientific interest and are scheduled monuments including the remains of trenches from the Herefordshire beacon or camp which was used by correct because in his last stand against the Romans. It is used for protected habitats and attract significant numbers of visitors including footpath and bridleways.

The promoters of this bill are the Malvern Hills trust and that is their working name. They are the Malvern Hills conservatives. They are there to preserve the hills for the benefit of the public.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

-- conservator. The trust was established by an acts of Parliament established by an acts of Parliament in 1884 and since then for further local acts have amended and local acts have amended and supplemented each other and the most recent act was passed in 1995. One recent act was passed in 1995. One of the purposes of the bill before your Lord is to consolidate this act. This would make good what the act. This would make good what the act.

This would make good what the late Lord Coe full said when he introduced the bill for the 1968 act introduced the bill for the 1968 act of the sixth reading in 1993. It was not out of order if I refer to my not out of order if I refer to my He said then in 1993, I have great sympathy with one of the petitioners who would like to see this private legislation consolidated. I'm sure that everybody would. The area it falls within the management of the trust consists of large parts of the health themselves and other areas of open land comprising reds -- roadside verges and comments.

The areas illustrated by a map has been deposited with the bill. The trust owns most but not all of the land within this management. About 90% of it is registered common land and virtually all of it open space. Accessible by the public on foot and on horseback. Lord Colville also remarked on the ever-increasing pressures on the hills as they become more and more popular. The pressures arising from the popularity continue to increase, and the need for the hills to be conserved and managed for the future public good remains strong as ever.

The trust is in a somewhat unusual position in it has the power to issue a levy on the residents of certain parishes in the local area. I will come onto that in more detail later. Particularly as it is one of the topics that has been raised in the instruction tabled by Lord Attlee. It is worth drawing your Lordships attention to the fact that the trust is a charity. As such, the trust has to comply with charity law and taking of guidance issued by the Charity commission.

As your Lordships are aware the purpose of the second reading is to consider the bill generally and approve the principal. In due course Select Committee will be appointed to examine the bill and the 50 petitions that have been deposited against it. The trust has looked through the petitions and will respond to all the petitioners. Common themes have been identified in the petitions and I will touch on some of them today. Part two of the bill has drawn more attention from petitioners than any other.

It would make significant changes to the composition of the Board of Trustees, which has not changed significantly in 100 years. The trust considers that its board needs to be smaller and it needs to include trustees who possess the skills necessary to manage an area of open space as significant as the hills. In line with good governance of other modern statutory bodies and Charity commission guidance. The mill -- the bill would achieve that. Currently the trust comprises 29 trustees, 11 directly elected by the residents of a levy paying parishes, and 18 nominated by various local authorities, and in the case of one trustee, by the Church trustee, by the Church Commissioners.

The bill proposes to reduce the overall number of trustees to 12, with six elected trustees and six appointed trustees. It has been suggested that the bill would dilate the proportion of elected trustees. The reality is that if the bill is enacted in its current form, the proportion of elected trustees will increase from 38% to 50%. Another point that has been raised by petitioners is about the charges that are proposed, changes that are proposed to the way elections will work. Currently the electors of three parishes and of some former wards of long abolished urban district council elected one or more trustees for their individual area.

The bill proposes one electoral area, combining all the areas which currently elect trustees so each one of the six elected trustees would be voted for by all the electors, rather than each trustee being chosen by the electors of an individual parish or ward. A complaint has been made is that this will mean parishes lose their representation on the board. But charity trustees are not representatives of the interests of representatives of the interests of those who appoint them. A trust object is to preserve and manage the hills for the benefit of the public as a whole, they are not to look after the interests of any particular area.

The trust and I are grateful to Lord Attlee for giving us the opportunity to comment on a draft does -- of his instruction which touches on the issue of the trust's constitution and I can say now that I do not intend to oppose it. I understand the nobles those concerns may overlap to some extent with those of the board as regards the potential for single issue candidates dominating the elected trustees. I'm sure that the committee will look into this in detail, but the position of the trust is that the bill strikes the right balance is between elected and appointed trustees.

Part three of the bill is about finance and includes clause 33 which deals with the levy which is the subject of the other limb of Lord Attlee's instruction. The first point is that clause 33 makes no changes to the current position. The parishes subject to the levy would not change, the amount which is charged at the time the bill attains Royal Assent would not change, the way the levy is collected would not change, and the statutory limitation of annual increases to the levy would not change.

The instruction would require the Select Committee to consider the area within which the levy is applied. I'm sure this would be a matter which the committee would wish to examine in any bill. And again I say again, I do not intend to oppose the instruction. At the request of the trust, Lord Attlee included some wording in his instruction about a restriction on the trust and what it can promote in the bill in relation to the levy. By law the trust had to obtain the consent of the Charity Commissioners to incur expenditure on the promotion of the bill.

As a condition of that consent, the trust must not incur inspect -- expenditure in promoting any material changes to the levy provisions including changes to the levy paying area. The trust is content of course with the levy clause is contained in the bill, and it will seek to persuade the committee of its merits. Part four of the bill deals with public access to and management of the hills. I think it is first words referring back to clause 5 for context. Clause 6 sets out the objects of the trust which are to protect, conserve and maintain landscape, natural appearance, habitats, flora and fauna, geology and archaeology of Malvern Hills and to keep the Malvern Hills and built on is open space for recreation and enjoyment of the public.

Alongside clauses 38 and 40 which respectively set out the statutory rights of the public to access the hills and impose a duty on the trust to keep the Hells unenclosed, there remains very significant protection of the hills into the future. I hope your Lordships have no complaint about the way the trust manages the hills now and about the provisions of part four, which in general terms consolidates the existing local legislation with very few changes. The most significant change in the bill is a new power, defence, not -- to fence common land to prevent animals straying from the bill does not provide the trust with a charter to build on the hills or install solar panels or wind turbines all over the hills, as some of the bill's detractors have rather fancifully suggested.

It is quite the opposite. The proposed construction by the noble Baroness coffee ask the committee pays particular attention to provisions which would impede or prevent public access. I strongly suspect that public access also will be of interest to the committee and I do not intend to impose, oppose her instruction. Part five of the bill restates in modern terms the trust's power to make and enforce bylaws with once can change. Namely a new power to issue fixed penalties. Part six deals with the trust power in relation to the land, and again makes no significant changes.

Finally I should mention in part seven clause 83, which is a new general power for the trust akin to general powers enjoyed by other statutory bodies and charities. It is important to note the inbuilt restrictions on the use of the power which means that any fears about the trust bypassing the provisions I just mentioned about preserving the hills cannot become reality. Baroness Coffey's proposed instruction also touches on the scope of the promoters powers. I'm sure that in any event the Select Committee will take particular interest in clause 83 and clause 84 which introduces a number of miscellaneous powers, all of which can only be exercised in order to further the objects of the trust.

The noble Baronesses instruction is based upon the instruction which was passed on second reading of the bill for the Malvern Hills act 1985 -- 1995 and following in the footsteps of the earlier Lord Colville as mentioned earlier, I do not intend to oppose it. I hope what I have said is persuasive enough your Lordships to allow the bill to be given a second reading and for it to -- Procedure Committee. I beg to move.
19:56
Earl Attlee Portrait Earl Attlee (Conservative)
-
-
The question is this bill is now ready second time.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm grateful to Lord Faulkner of Worcester for his usual expert Worcester for his usual expert introduction of the bill today. I think the promoters would have been hard pushed to find a more suitable hard pushed to find a more suitable and capable. To move the second reading. Assuming your Lordships to reading. Assuming your Lordships to give the bill a second reading I will then move my motion that it be an instruction to the committee an instruction to the committee considering the bill that they consider both the precept area and the electoral arrangements.

This will not prevent the committee considering, subject to the Standing Orders governing us procedures, any Orders governing us procedures, any other matters it sees fit or the many petitioners that have been many petitioners that have been deposited and the noble Lord recognised that. I am indeed indebted to the noble Lord for agreeing in advance that he will not oppose my motion. I will gently point out to Baroness Coffey that the drafting of my motion was very carefully considered and agreed with the promoters in early February this year.

If both instructions are agreed and they probably will be, your Lordships Committee of Selection will have to decide between composing a committee that is ideal for considering the electoral and precept conditions, issues, or one that is ideal for considering if I may put it this way, the AOM B and access aspects of the bill. But I would rather myself I think that the electoral and precept area is more important. My interest in the Malvern Hills arose through my wife who was born in the little Malvern and we regularly attend local events.

By chance last Saturday we were in Malvern and climbed the Worcestershire beacon and my hips have just about recovered. We have no property interest in Malvern although my wife siblings do. I would like to think that I'm very well briefed about the MHT, I have an open mind, I have some serious anxieties regarding the governance of MHT. In particular, last year the board had lost its chair in acrimonious circumstances and there were accusations that the board was being run by a small group and was holding information from certain trustees.

Some trustees complained of not getting information in a timely way or even at all. I have taken up the governance matters with the charities commission at the highest level, and this is no longer a matter for me to deal with as I am not equipped to deal with it, nor is it my role. It should be noted that not all trustees are in favour of the bill. However, advice from the charities commission is that the decision of the trustees do not have to be unanimous.

I would like to echo the comments made by Lord Faulkner about the operational side of MHT despite a recent tragedy. I have no doubt that the Malvern Hills are being very well looked after. There is an excellent new Chief Executive in place, I would also agree that the five acts of Parliament that govern the Malvern Hills need to be brought up-to-date. Some of the drafting is archaic and refers to organisations that are no longer excellent and the trustees are constrained in what they can do.

Compared with the eight petitions in 1995 there are 50 petitions on this occasion reflecting the complexity and the controversy of the bill. Many of them are very well argued and I'm sure that the committee will look at them all carefully. Removal of the words natural aspect from the objects of the act and replacing it with the words, natural appearance, is one example of shared concern of those living in or close to the Malvern Hills or surrounding Commons.

Others concern us over this and other ancient rights of In the context of the trusts right to grant land access easement, residents fear the changed wording would invalidate previous case law and councils opinion on what might affect the national aspect, leaving the door wide open for future developments being facilitated. Natural aspect continues to be used and understood in the planning context and neither the Conservatives or Wimbledon and Putney common have chosen to remove those words from the act.

One important issue raised by many practitioners is whether or not MHT is a public body. Last year, I tabled a written Parliamentary question on this point and it was confirmed by the government MHT is not a public body. However, only very recently ONS undertook a reclassification exercise and has determined that MHT is a public body. My understanding is ONS did not consult with MHT before making conclusions public, which is rather surprising with MHT in the course of putting a private bill through Your Lordships' House.

If it is a public body, they might be subject to Freedom of Information requests, but it is not well enough resourced to deal with this. I'm not even a fan of Freedom of Information, even though I have used it myself. Can the Minister tell the House what she thinks the position is regarding FOIA and MHT? Some of the practitioners make compelling arguments that MHT is a public body arguments that MHT is a public body because it takes in a preset source of income, parking charges are considerable but those are the provision of the service whilst charitable income is ineligible.

If it was a normal charity, funders could walk away if they disagree with how it's being run, but instead with how it's being run, but instead they must pay a compulsory levy. No doubt MHT will consider the implication of the latest development, but I think the Committee will have two consider several potential consequences and these might include distinguishing between the legal and statutory requirement of being classed as a public body and distinct from its role of the charity receiving donations.

As a public body, they could have a duty to levy payers rather than only acting in the best interest of the charity as pointed out by the noble Lord. If I could identify two major areas of concern of the area, i.e. The area under jurisdiction of the trust. They are the subject of my instruction to the Committee and are both linked. The first is a long-standing anomaly that some residents pay while others in MHT landholding area do not.

While the existing ads allows the levy paying area applied to wayfarers and commoners and any time and from time to time the provisions have never been used. However the new draft position in clause 71.6 appears to give the power only on land acquired in the future. So residents in those existing areas will never bear the portion of the preset. Will orders by the Secretary of State on clause 71 really require the affirmative order process? The trustee recognises that some payment levy and some are not is illogical and unfair, but of course there is no financial advantage for them in changing this because the total preset received would remain the same but there would be some increased trust.

On the other hand, existing concerns argue they are exposed to an existing burden of cost especially as 46% of the trust landholding is outside the preset area and the trust has the power to purchase more land. Parliament owes it to the residents to have the matter of the preset very carefully considered. The second issue is electoral or arrangement for trustees and noble Lords explained it to the trustees, and proposals to have all of the combined interest in a single electoral area is of concern because they believe they would lose their democratic right to elect their own representative.

The concern is the new arrangement will extinguish the practice established in 1884 of ensuring a particular individual need for the different parishes of rural, urban and agricultural are properly considered through the local trustee. This may become particularly relevant if MHT is a public body. A further concern is non-levy payers, many live in rural areas and have no voice at all. Extending the preset area could result in this anomaly and matching that to the landholding of MHT was envisaged in the 1884 act because it is the Conservatives acquired land in the future and they have the powers to levy the relevant parishes and wouldn't be entitled to appoint Conservative.

Those appointed by local councils across the area under MHT jurisdiction to be replaced by six individual trustees via a new nomination contingent from anywhere in the country with no necessary connection and will further dilate the ability to have a voice in the trust. Surely the necessary expertise can be found from within the area or at the very least within 35 miles. The question remains if the link with all local councils is the best way of managing the deal effectively.

Perhaps residents will be better served if the transport in some or all expertise as and when needed and instead increased numbers of elected trustees to give a fairer representation. In addition to some concerns I've had time to mention and concerned that over time the new arrangement would mean it would be arrangement would mean it would be too easy of a single issue pressure group for serious adverse consequences as pointed out by the noble Lord in conclusion, I hope they will welcome the bill and I think it is essential to instruct the Committee to look at the areas I suggested.

The Committee will consider the position and other matters as well and I hope the committees task will be somewhat committees task will be somewhat owner is. -- onerus.
20:09
Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle Portrait Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)
-
-
I thank him for his speech and instruction and I thank him for introducing the bill. I have the misfortune not to have a special connection to the Malvern Hills. I have visited their number of times but I have had representations from people who are concerned about their future who asked me to speak today and they are passionate about the future of the hills and they support the bill and the way forward.. What is important is this is a charity and it is the charity commission that we know is important to keeping a sense of direction following the body and their aim.

I must reflect on the question of why we are here in Westminster debating this bill. According to Google Maps, it would take one day and 20 hours to walk to the top of the Malvern Hills. I do not think I'd do it in that time myself but that is what is the record it would take four hours by public transport. 120 miles, the average speed is 30 miles an hour which is an indictment of public transport, but nonetheless, the question is why do we have a system of government that means we are here in Westminster debating the future of a local area and wouldn't it be better if this was local area having debate about it.

We need to do the best we can and that is what they are doing. I think a couple of points I want to make. Lord Faulkner outlined so much that I won't go over so much of what he did, but it is important to go through the reduction and that figure is the maximum number represented by the code in the guidance. I think most in this chamber and elsewhere would have found themselves on many governing bodies, trusts, bodies over the year and I think 12 is large and we know how difficult decision-making can be in those situations.

I think it is important to stress if it is inactive in the current form, the portion of elected current form, the portion of elected trustees increases to 50%. This is a modernisation of moving forwards and that is the overall direction of the bill. 1.25 million visitors a year according to the University of Bristol figures, and it is worth noting many commented on what good state the Malvern Hills are in, and I did look this up. The word derives from the Celtic and that is obviously a historic name but we know we live in these corners of this planet and I sure we can do better by nature, we can do better with so many visitors and we know the importance of green spaces to public health to make them as good as they can be.

For farmers and communities, this is an attempt to make a step forward and modernisation and ideally we would not be doing this at all, but this is the rules we operate. I support the direction of the bill. the direction of the bill.
20:13
Baroness Thornhill Portrait Baroness Thornhill (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I would thank Lord Faulkner and Lord Attlee for a detailed, comprehensive look at the bill. Several years ago when I was working for the Local Government Association with councillors in Malvern Hills, I came to enjoyed being in the town and I found a super B&B on the main road and I particularly enjoyed the backdrop of the Malvern Hills, but I also heard of issues back then with the Malvern Hills trust as it likes to be known.

When I saw this coming forward, my interest was piqued. It did not take long to see the changes in this bill when meeting considerable opposition and I emphasise considerable. As a former elected mayor I and no stranger to vocal members of the public voting for any modernisation in any organisation however they are constituted and are resistant to any change whatsoever at all. Do not get me started on development. The opposition to the bill is something of a completely different order.

As a member of the office staff said to me, I have close friends in Malvern and they said the whole town is talking about it and evidence confirms that they are. Be assured that they are having a debate and it is in acrimonious meetings. Might I suggest that the House received over 50 individual, highly articulate, well-intentioned petitions including petitions from the local county, district, and parish councillors, councils, former chairs of the Malvern Hills conservatives and even from a group of current trustees.

That to me is a red. Raising substantive concerns in respect of the bill and it tells a tale itself. I think the House received more petitions in this bill than it has received in total in the past 10 years for all private bills. The fact that the concerns appear to be being completely ignored, it begs the question as to the motives behind these changes. What will the bill change? What powers has granted that causes such a furore of public opinion? I have no doubt that the trust could and should be improved and that is not why I'm proposing the bill but it must be improved.

I do believe the PR has been dire or we would not be in the situation that we are now. The noble Lord said how wonderfully things have been managed, how good things are, but we have to change. I would argue they have not made the case for change to the general public and that is by the manner in which they have conducted their affairs and consultation and I think that needs to be updated. -- Looked at. As well as consolidating the existing five acts wish to be granted substantial additional powers.

Whilst being governed by a much smaller and as outlined well by the noble Lord Attlee a small and less democratic For example of one of the six elected people stand down, the other six can appoint a person in their stead. It is absolutely easier to be taken over a single issue pressure group. The evidence suggests that little if any thought has been given by the promoters to the substantive concerns raised by the levy paying public in Malvern which fund this and I am going to use the words public body.

I commend the word of the Malvern environmental protection group in bringing these issues to the attention of the public. There is even a dispute as to what the constitutional nature of the trust actually is. Several noble Lords have referred to them as being a charity, and yet as recently as last month we have heard they are deemed by AKC to be a public body and that is usually defined by the amount of taxation that they get as part of their revenue which again was well expressed by the noble Earl -- KC.

This must be clarified because you will be very aware that there is significant legal differences that as to whether you are a public body or a charity and what you can do, what you can't do and to whom you are accountable. This lack of clarity is making members of the public nervous and whether rightly or wrongly question the motives and intentions of the trustees going forward and this has understandably set has running and it might seem with good reason.

Because something starts to smell not quite right when as mentioned by lower Earl Attlee the former chair issues around the former chair I understand that she could not find out how much a senior official of her trust was being paid. We all know that if you are the chair of any board you are responsible. The two not be able to know and have that information tells you that something is a bit rotten in the state of Denmark. These anxieties and fears were further fuelled when it recent meetings to discuss this bill and the financial arrangements regarding it, eight trustees were effectively gagged from speaking or voting.

And in successive board meetings the level of transparency and accountability would appear to for significantly below will be expected of any public body, and indeed anyone -- well run body, and indeed anyone -- well run -- Any well-run charity. Given public circumstances I am shocked they are pushing ahead regardless of the jolly with this level of concern and so many unanswered questions, including from their own trustees, should be leaving them to think again. So yes, I am also deeply concerned about the governance arrangements.

These proposals remove 140 years accountability to local councils and the public and should not be cast off lightly. I sent the public feel is they have been given really good reasons for this change. Everything is going wonderful, everything is terrific it's all managed well, but we need to modernise and move forward. What does that actually mean? If power could pass to a small group people to take over and run the trust there is fear that corruption has increased, and of course that changes will be made to alter the nature of and access to the hills and also that it could make significant amounts of money the rights of taxpaying residents to question challenge this body is eroded as to how that money is spent, right they have enjoyed 440 years of retaining its status of clarifying its status as a public body is vital to ensure that the organisation remains subject to judicial review and the ability to be subject to freedom of in summary I therefore welcome -- Freedom of Information Act.

In summary I therefore welcome Baroness Coffey's proposals to a large extent to the bill although I genuinely think the access issue, the one line in your proposal is something that I think should be left to trustees and not be down to us to dictate. But I feel that we need to consider the arrangements concerning the appointment of board members and in the scope of the levy paying area, and also to urge my noble Lords to carefully consider the application for a general power.

What might be of interest to your Lordships and you've got to indulge me on this, it's probably because I'm married to historian, is that when the Lordships in 1995 when the act was discussed at that time Baroness Macleod of Beauvais said, it would empower the Conservatives to change the face of Malvern forever. Lord Hampton added, the Conservatives are seeking powers well beyond those needed to carry out their prime functions. Lord Moran commented, there is no explanation of why the Conservatives thought that their required these comparatively sweeping powers.

And these objections seem to me to be still valid because they haven't answered them. Because of the lack of good Finally I urge the promoters of this bill to very carefully consider the costs they are incurring. There was yet another acrimonious meeting where questions went unanswered about the amounts of money and that also is not good. If you're mainly funded by taxpayers they want to know what you're spending their money on and how much this is all going to cost.

It would appear their estimates of the true final costs could be over a million. Compared with their annual income of 1.4 million. Have the Conservatives actively engage with those who articulated the concerns? I believe they would have saved themselves a great deal of time, effort and expense. There is still an opportunity to do this now. It should never have been necessary for five trustees to have had to petition this House. With the consequences that they and others appear currently arbitrarily suspended from matters relating to that bill.

I do believe that the committee have their work cut out, but having been on a private Bill Committee I have no doubt that they will do it and do it well. And that the suggestions for their work from both the noble Baroness and the Earl going in the right direction but I really feel that the Conservatives should answer the question raised and conduct themselves in a more open and transparent manner than it would appear is happening at the moment.

Then we can come to an amicable situation which we can satisfy most of the people, because one of the things I have learned of years in politics, you can never please all of the people all of the time I used to settle for pleasing some of the people some of the time. Air
20:24
Lord Murphy of Torfaen Portrait Lord Murphy of Torfaen (Labour)
-
-
That puts a different light on things. I would like to support my noble friend Lord Faulkner of Worcester in supporting this particular private bill and I obviously would like to commend Earl Attlee for his detailed explanation of the points that he made like Lord Faulkner did. I understand the points that Lady Thornhill made about the difficulties faced in more Vernon -- Malvern hills, but two points I would like to make regarding that, the first is that the Malvern Hills really are not just local or a regional or even a national, they are an international significance and importance.

In a way I expect that if private bill, after all 140 years ago set up the trust, is to be used, it's being used because the Malvern Hills are used because the Malvern Hills are so utterly important to our country. Air like Lady Thornhill I've served on private bills in the other place and they do a very thorough job, the Select Committees do a very thorough job. I have no doubt that the Select Committee which your Lordships will appoint to deal with this bill will do an equally thorough job and clearly need to do precisely that.

So let's see what happens but that's the mechanism we have in front of us and that's why it's such an important issue. I just want to touch for a few moments and why me as a Welshman I'm interested in the Malvern Hills. After all we got a few hills of Verona and Wales including my own former constituency including my own former constituency where I live, my Valley, they rise to 1,500 feet above sea level, 100 feet more than the Melbourne hills.

-- Malvern Hills I'm not sure they're quite as beautiful as the Malvern Hills and they wouldn't have said that when I was a member of Parliament that constituency but the Malvern Hills are a wonderful, wonderful part of our scenery in England and it seems to me that why we doing this is because of the huge significance and importance in our society. I fell in love with the more Vernon -- Malvern Hills in the 1960s. During the last month on two occasions, I always remember the first time I approached those hills from Ross on Wye then you got to Ledbury and you see these magnificent Malvern Hills.

To me were always associated with my other love, which is Sir Edward Elgar. The greatest British composer in my view. Some of your Lordships might be, I am certainly old enough to remember Ken Russell's film, black- and-white film on the life of Elgar. It opens with Elgar, young Elgar riding across the top of the Malvern Hills to the sound of the introduction of Allegro. Every time I go even now after all these years go to the Malvern Hills, that music is in my year.

And remember that is in my year. And remember that Elgar himself was a more Vernon -- Malvern Hills man. He lived 76 years, 55 are those who lived in Malvern Hills. The graves of himself and his wife and his daughter lie in Saint Walston's Catholic church in the foothills. To those of us who love his music, the Enigma variations were actually written amongst other things when he was within the site of the Malvern Hills. So I think there is an importance of acquainting or associating the work of this great composer and of British music with these wonderful hills.

That's why it's important to me, there are all sorts of other reasons why the Malvern Hills are important, I can't climb them, I walk them, I even write a car across them will stop it's only eight miles, but nevertheless to me those hills are something so very special that something like this means that they deserve the sort of scrutiny and the sort of attention that a Select Committee for the House of Lords can give them. I conclude by saying to your Lordships that in 1934 the year that Elgar died, not long before he did die he wrote this.

If ever after I am dead you hear someone whistling the theme of my cello concerto on the more Vernon Hills, don't be alarmed -- more Vernon Hills. -- More Vernon Hills will stop it's

**** Possible New Speaker ****

only me. I'm delighted to contribute to this debate and it's a huge pleasure this debate and it's a huge pleasure follow other noble Lords. I think it's been an interesting exposure so far of not only the passion that
20:29
Baroness Coffey Portrait Baroness Coffey (Conservative)
-
-
far of not only the passion that people have this wonderful part of our country but also the interest in what has brought this bill to this point. The noble Baroness, the noble Lady Baroness Bennett talked about local people and local area. Interestingly the Malvern Hills trust area is actually enveloped within an AOM B, but as has already been pointed out one of the reasons why we are in this rather unusual situation is that we recognised well over 100 years ago that not only should this area be protected but also there I say a levy needs to be done to help contribute towards that.

We know that the act in 1949 and the creation of the National Park's, the creation of AOM bees and there are some to be said here thinking about the governance will stop it's not an area a suggestion I want to specifically recommend to this House or the committee, but one of the things that has certainly come up in the situation is that governance about it is the charity, public policy, is it even a public authority. Is this special situation which is why we have this bill here It's not the first private bill I've been involved in I was involved in DEFRA and one of the things that is interesting is the noble Lady the Minister and Baroness Twycross here and coming from DCMS is the charity.

We should bear in mind that the trust itself only became a charity in 1984 because it was legally required to do so. The other thing that has not been set out to your Lordships today is the Conservatives considered a different approach and the two charity acts that have been doing similar acts in 2011. The process that initiated it and went a long way to ensure it could change as they recognise to simplify the process but also given the degree of concern in opposition however you want to say it, that the Secretary of State at the time and the charities commission rejected the approach of taking it through the charities act Parliamentary procedure and said that it should come back as a private bill.

It gets the full scrutineer that was expected. -- Scrutineer that was expected. I thank him for his contribution to the bill so far. I'm conscious he has engaged in thinking some time ago of how to make the governance a focus of discussion, a key issue raised in several petitions. I am conscious of what Baroness Thornhill said and she is right to raise those concerns. There is trouble up mill. It is not a happy ship and it should not necessarily need Parliament to be involved in that, but recognising the state we are in and recognising that we don't want anyone to have this trust, this body, to be relaxed.

If it was to be absorbed, here we are and it is right to have a Select Committee to consider these important issues. One of the reasons I put my instruction in is because the private bill is rarely used in Parliament. There are only a handful of other places. The only other places similar would be what happens places similar would be what happens in Ashdown Forest, perhaps the new Forest, a far more ancient aspect of governance but still put into statute, and a similar one, much smaller but similar, where we have the Wimbledon and Putney Commons trust.

What this has in common with Wilburn -- Wimbledon and Putney trust is the requirement of a levy and that lends itself to the government and is what lends itself to people being concerned that by now being under their own volition, don't know the reasons why exactly they are part of the Charity Commission, but it feels like the trustees and board of directors are basically saying we must follow what the Charity Commission was saying, not necessarily the original status of what was put forward.

That is why I understand why people are concerned about the changes in representation and the impact on the future of this very special part of our country. There are other situations it has been mentioned about the proportion of trustees and directors, whatever they will be called, to be elected directly and then appointed. In effect what we seem to have is a National Trust counselling session with a balance there, but I would put the point which has adequate the been put forward by some of the councils the appointed bodies apart from the Church Commissioners, all of the other bodies I believe are elected in their own right and will appoint someone to do that.

It is a changing point which is why this attracted such attention from as has been pointed out a record number of petitioners on a private bill. Not the same as a Hybrid bills, but a record number of petitioners according to the clerks of a private bill. The reason I'm interested is this is a special part of the country. Through my experience as a minister is understanding how passionately people feel about a very special place where they live, where they treasure, where they want to consider to be special and are nervous not only about aspects of the government but some of the aspects of clauses being put in the bill.

One of the things about the private bill is I'm not suggesting and I don't know where the equivalents of the under gallery here and I appreciate the Parliamentary agent will be here at some point, and I won't suggest they will try to strike out a number of petitioners, but we have already heard from Baroness Thornhill that some people currently on the board that made a petition to express publicly their concerns are in a particular procedure and process. To that extent, one of the things that can happen is that if certain petitions are struck out, it is not required by the Select Committee to consider issues that they may have raised.

That is the reason why the noble Lord Faulkner is accurate to say I basically copied and pasted, recycling classic over environmental stuff, the instruction of the departed Baroness Macleod in consideration today. I put the commercial side in because there is sense in increasing the opportunity for the trust to raise money themselves in a variety of ways which they seem somewhat constrained to do. I'm not intending to go through the different petitions but there are valid discussions about aspects of the bill including the Parliamentary agent working with trusts and promoters to tidy up parts of the bill that just don't work today.

There are references in here to subsections that don't exist in the bill. That is not a matter for the Select Committee, but that must be tidied up stop coming back to this key question of if it is a charity or public body, there is no definition of what a public body is and I'm mindful of the question and response of the question posed by Lord Attlee the government said it was not a public body, meanwhile ONS came forward. I'm not surprised by the classification that it is a public body/public authority because I cannot think of another example, potentially the Commons trust at Wimbledon and Putney, that can actually require a levy to be imposed on people and not be considered some kind of public authority.

I don't want to go into and the like, but I noticed on their own website that the trust refers to the fact they refer to obligation and the public obligation, obligation free public law about biodiversity. -- into FOI and the like. I wrote that and past that legislation myself. It is considered to be public authorities. That does not mean, even though the bill puts in a lot of powers to the Secretary of State, unclear right now and I'm grateful if the Minister would clarify if that means the Secretary of State for culture media and sport and does it mean the Secretary of State for DEFRA of who makes these determinations in the future.

It is determinations in the future. It is those sorts of things as a consequence and this is how the element is going through and you are not here to represent areas with what the charity says. It does really need careful scrutiny. Earl Attlee will put a perfect construction in. My name has been copied and pasted but it was the intention of making sure other issues were brought forward by our practitioners to be carefully considered. I'm conscious that access is an important matter of debate and a recent Supreme Court ruling again linked to legislation ruling again linked to legislation in this House.

That legislation does not apply anywhere else in the country. It only applies to Dartmoor. That is because of the wording of the act. That is why overall I'm really keen to have the Select Committee to consider carefully all of the factors that petitioners have raised and it is why I have put forward an instruction to make sure, despite of what else has happened in parliament, it is considered and I will not the opposing the second reading of the bill and I hope the Committee will give it fair consideration on behalf of practitioners and on behalf of Parliament.

Parliament.
20:42
Lord Hampton Portrait Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
-
-
I beg leave to speak in the gap and I apologise I did not put my name down. I declare an interest that I grew up in the Malvern Hills that I grew up in the Malvern Hills and I went to school there. Baroness Thornhill slightly took the wind out of my sails by quoting my father but I will quote him more from the second reading. I love the hills as they are and I do not anticipate with pleasure any major change.

I've not follow the arguments as carefully as I should have done. I was alerted to the proposal that the Malvern Hills conservatives were seeking considerable extra powers for those offices and warehouses to make roads and defence to fence areas off. If I would quote my cousin in the same debate, however my noble friend will know that if the bill goes through in its present form it is possible and even probable that the Malvern Hills will be ruined forever.

That is one of the reasons for putting down instructions to the Committee. Worcestershire is the most lovely county and the Malvern Hills the most beautiful range of hills in the country. I start with clause 3, the first clause that matters, which empowers conservators to change the face of the Malvern Hills forever. They could have a little chef and a fish and chip shop. All of those eating places are welcome in the right place, but not on the Malvern Hills.

We had dire predictions in 1993, but when I was there, it was 1993, but when I was there, it was as beautiful as ever. This does seem a very sensible bill. a very sensible bill.
20:44
Baroness Twycross Portrait Baroness Twycross (Labour)
-
-
I pleased to contribute to an important and is string debate on a much loved institution and I thank the noble Lord and the Malvern Hills trust and I'm grateful for them preparing a case on the bill explain the aims of the bill. The movements are a spectacular area, rich in wildlife and loved by local communities. Those were wonderful communities. Those were wonderful parts of the scenery. As Lord Faulkner outlined and was referred to by other noble Lords, the Malvern Hills trust has been endowed since 1884 with the protection of managing the Malvern Hills which is not only an area of outstanding natural beauty, but over 159 special sites of interest.

I know the bill will not protect and maintain the natural aspects of the hills and having them built on open space for public recreation. Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle noted the intention of the bill is modernisation stop DCMS will always welcome charities ensuring they follow the best practices of law and governance and it is clear from the petition there is clear local interest in the Malvern Hills trust and the importance of preserving local access to the hills for future I particularly enjoyed Lord Hampton's contribution, it must be unusual to hear your father watching the debate from decades ago and must be less usual to be able to quote to close relatives from the same debate.

I also like to thank Earl Attlee and Baroness Coffey for the instructions they have tabled. These will ensure that the bill receives detailed scrutiny as it proceeds to the Committee stage. I would like to the Committee stage. I would like to For the recent ONS decision to classify the Malvern Hills trust is a public body for as the noble Earl said the Office for National Statistics recently announced it has classified the Malvern Hills trust to the local government subsector of the public sector for the purposes of economic statistics.

I'm grateful to the noble Earl for helpfully drawing us to our attention. It will be for the Malvern Hills trust themselves what if any implications this classification has for charity, but it is properly possible in response to Baroness Thornhill and Baroness Coffey's point to be both a charity and a public body. In relation to the noble Earls point on the Freedom of Information Act and the Freedom of Information Act and Will be subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the ONS clarification does not mean the Malvern Hills trust is subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Separate legislation would be needed to bring the trust within the scope of Freedom of Information Act requests. The noble Lady Baroness Thornhill raised the number of complaints and petitions from local residents against this bill. Which was alluded to the number of speeches including Baroness Coffey. It is clear that there are significant local interest in the role of the trust in preserving Malvern Hill for the benefit of future generation to the top this level of public interest is to be welcomed. I note there have been a large number petitions lodged against this bill and I would encourage the trust to work with petitioners to respond to the concerns and find workable solutions.

The noble Lady Baroness Thornhill raised the use of the general power in clause 83 and whether this is required. General powers are very common in the charity sector, the Charity commission's published model governing documents for charities includes a general power. In relation to the Malvern Hills trust, the general power can only be used to further the charities work in pursuit of its charitable objectives and it would not alter anything in the way the sale of the land and the granting of easements was dealt with.

The noble Lady Baroness Coffey asked why the changes proposed aren't being made through secondary. Given the nature of some of the charities proposals coupled with strong levels of public interest locally, DCMS and the Charity commission agreed it would be more appropriate for these measures to be delivered through private bill. This approach allows greater scope Republican parliamentary scrutiny and debate then would be the case under section 73 procedure where such measures are not usually always debated in Parliament. In relation to the noble Lady's question on which Secretary of State is referred to, it would be the Secretary of State with policy responsibility, so primarily debt free -- DEFRA in most instances, but MHCLG in relation to others.

As noble Lords will know in relation to private bills the government does not adopt a position unless the bill contains provisions considered to be contrary to public policy. We take the view that this bill does not contain any such provisions. Therefore as is the
20:51
Lord Faulkner of Worcester Portrait Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour)
-
-
tradition with private bills this government will not be adopting a position with regards to this bill. I'm sure however that the trust will want to reflect carefully on the want to reflect carefully on the points made by noble Lords in today's debate as the bill proceeds to Committee stage. to Committee stage. By the tone and content of every speech that has been made in this speech that has been made in this debate, particularly from my noble friend the Minister he was actually answered a number of points raised by others as the debate has gone on which I therefore don't need to which I therefore don't need to repeat my wind up now.

What I would like to do is possible to endorse what Lord Murphy said about the international status of the Malvern international status of the Malvern Hills. The fact it is wider than Worcestershire, wider than the mice, they are an international icon -- they are an international icon -- West Midlands. It is the determination of everybody concerned with the trust in the future to make sure it goes on. The comments from Lord Hampton about his father I assume, and the dire predictions that he uttered in 1993, it's interesting the hills have not been ruined over the last what is it 32 years? There's no McDonald's on the hill or a Kentucky fried chicken, the hills are as, in a condition today as good as it was back in 1993.

What this bill today is about is to modernise the governance, modernise the levy paying arrangements and to ensure that there is consultation with local residents. I note what Baroness Thornhill said, each she is the great critic, critic I think of the trust and of the consultation, but it's fair to say that the trust went to...

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Not of how they have managed the affairs in the bill, how they have managed this process with the bill managed this process with the bill is what. I hope it came across to everyone rather than how they conduct the general management, because I wouldn't dream to be able to make comments on that and I

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to make comments on that and I wouldn't be in a position to do that. I'm grateful to the noble Lady for clarification. But she is for clarification. But she is presumably aware that 15,000 leaflets were distributed to households in the area, posters were households in the area, posters were put up and businesses and Cafe's put up and businesses and Cafe's were also leafleted, advertisements from the local press, social media from the local press, social media and drop-in sessions. With an issue like this you can't please all the people all the time which is I think people all the time which is I think almost exactly her words by way she finished her speech.

I am certainly satisfied that they have done the best they can and I'm certain that the points that have been made in the debate tonight will be taken on board by the Select Committee, but it's the Select Committee which can look at the petitions and they will consider all the other points which have been raised today. The noble Earl Lord Lansley his contribution I'm delighted to pay tribute to and his interest in the formulation of the bill is one that deserves the highest praise, did express concern about the possible dominance of single issue candidates such as those perhaps proposed by the housing in the area.

I imagine the committee will consider this in detail but there are one or two points that can be made in response. First this could happen where there was a single electoral area as proposed in the bill, or as now if candidates were elected by individual parishes or wards. It's worth bearing in mind that the exercise of democracy and the election of Trustees has not been entirely without problems. One example is that most sees seats under the present arrangements go uncontested. Eight of 11 seats were uncontested.

Eight of 11 seats were uncontested at the election. If an interest in election can be announced by creation of a smaller Board of Trustees than that change is worthwhile. I don't intend to answer the question of public body or charity, that I think is something which the Select Committee will want to look at and it could seem to me that it hasn't got the dire consequences which perhaps some people seem to think. The levy, which Lord Attlee mentioned in his instruction, it's important to remember that a trust is under a constraint which means it can't incur expenditure on promoting provisions in the bill which are materially different from the existing levy legislation.

The bill brings together the existing levy arrangements into one clause with modern drafting and deserves the status quo. -- Preserves the status quo Baroness Coffey briefly returned to the Dartmoor judgement. Whether that is a question of open access and the freedoms which visitors on Dartmoor have, but I would say the trust has been studying the judgement and they will obviously take account of any elements that have implications in the drafting of the spell. It's something which I imagine the Select Committee will want to hear about.

I would say that the existing Malvern Hills legislation and the bylaws make provision to prevent camping on the hills so I can't see the Malvern Hills being turned into a giant campsite as a result of the Dartmoor judgement. I hope that either the Minister or I have been able to address most of the points that are of importance to noble Lords. The promoters of the bill have as I mentioned earlier continue to work hard, to conserve natural beauty of the hills and I'm delighted how many of your Lordships have referred to the natural beauty of the hills, but time has undoubtedly come for the modernisation in the way in which the trust is constituted and to update and consolidate its powers.

Again leading to my predecessor in moving a private bill on Malvern Hills or -- Lord Colville I hope your Lordships will see that as a matter of principle it is wholly reasonable to try to bring the legislation up-to-date, subject of course to getting it right. As a number of noble Lords have said, that is the point of the Select Committee procedure and I hope therefore the noble Lords will give this bill a second reading and establish the Select Committee.

I beg to move.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that this bill is now ready second time. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Malvern Hills "Contents" have it. Malvern Hills bill instruction motion Earl Attlee

**** Possible New Speaker ****

moved formally? Moved formally. The question is that this motion is agree to. As many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. Malvern Hills bill instruction motion Baroness bill instruction motion Baroness Coffey moved formally? The question is that this motion is agree to. As many are of that opinion say, many are of that opinion say, "Content", and of the contrary, "Not content". The "Contents" have it. We will allow a moment for the chamber will allow a moment for the chamber to rearrange itself before the next Question Question for Question for Short Question for Short Debate, Question for Short Debate, special Question for Short Debate, special education, Baroness Wolf.

-- Baroness Bull. Baroness Bull.
20:58
Baroness Bull Portrait Baroness Bull (Crossbench)
-
-
It's a privilege to introduce this debate, the first in either house to both -- focus on dyscalculia. I look forward to the contributions of all note noble Lords on a range of educational needs and disabilities will top I'm grateful to the dyscalculia network on whose work I will draw. Two years ago, Rishi Sunak announced his maths to 18 proposal and my 10-year-old great-niece lost no time in the explain the impact it would have on pupils like her who struggle with maths.

Until then I had never heard of dyscalculia nation discovered I wasn't alone. Everyone I asked returned the same length there, dyslexia yes, dyscalculia near no. I found no definition of it on the DfE website and no guidance for parents and teachers. No mention in the NHS A-Z of conditions although dyslexia A-Z of conditions although dyslexia and dyspraxia are there, Hansard recalls that while 449 MPs and peers have raised dyslexia, only 13 have ever mentioned dyscalculia. I biggest surprise was to find that teachers, even maths teachers do not learn about dyscalculia while training despite prevalence rates of one in 20 suggesting there is at least one dyscalculia child in every classroom across the UK.

With similar traits to dyslexia and impact as severe, dyscalculia's low profile is hard to explain. Dyscalculia is a specific neurodevelopment condition with a biological basis, you are born with it and it lasts throughout life. Maths learning difficulties exist on the spectrum but the 2025 SAS the guidance says the defining factor in dyscalculia's pronouncement difficulty in processing numerical magnitude despite adequate intellectual ability and age- appropriate education. Put simply, dyscalculia pupils are more likely than typical learners to struggle to understand place values and the ordering of structure of numbers.

This can affect their ability to recognise which of two numbers is greater, even when they are orders of magnitude apart such as 100 even when they are orders of magnitude apart such as 110,000. For most of us this is hard to imagine, we take for granted that adding two numbers makes a larger one, but for someone with dyscalculia it is nonsensical suggesting adding a to B results in a larger letter. They may also fail to intuit number pattern links, for example needing to count the corners of the square to know there are four.

As a result dyscalculia may result on finger counting and struggle to members remember number based factual estimate quantities and these challenges spill over into Without effective intervention, dyscalculia can likely impact careers in health outcomes, and it's not a massive leap to surmise that the well evidence effects of low numeracy could be of even more significance dyscalculia as they are so rarely diagnosed and supported, but most experts agree targeted interventions improve outcomes and the earlier they start, the more effective LB.

Mathematical development is like a staircase, each step depending on the one below. But early intervention depends on early identification and formal diagnosis is rare. A dyslexic child is 100 times more likely to be diagnosed. Dyscalculiac's say diagnosis helps them get the right support, and avoid the shame of being labelled stupid, but the £900 cost is often beyond reach. And school is the place where this might first be identified and it underlines the pivotal role of Cinco's and teachers.

Government's position is that all teachers are teachers of special educational needs. The new framework for initial teacher training and early careers to deliberately does not detail approaches specific to additional needs but prioritises high quality teaching is key to addressing SEND. Schools are required to identify needs and implement personalised support plans that meet the unique needs of individual pupils. In principle, this approach is laudable but in practice it only works if all teachers and Cinco's can recognise specific learning difficulties and/or up-to-date on interventions for support, and for dyscalculia this dust isn't the case for top 2023 study found 43% of teachers are not familiar at all or only slightly familiar with dyscalculia and both teachers and Cinco's were likely to teachers and Cinco's were likely to harbour myths about the condition.

Knowledge is not required through daily work and highlighting the importance of CPD. And this is doubly concerning because while the new framework does contain more content relevant to supporting students with SEND, it applies the learning about specific needs be covered primarily during school placements, whereas we know knowledge and awareness are likely to be low. This is not a criticism of schools and educators, rather of the inherent logical lacuna in government's approach. In a climate of low awareness and absent of any training about dyscalculia and how it manifests, how can this condition blind approach to teacher training deliver a learning experience that meets the unique needs of dyscalculiac pupils? Or else the noble Lady the Minister how will government review the effectiveness of the framework in delivering for pupils with specific learning difficulties? They consider dyscalculia screening alongside the A1 phonics check to enable early intervention? And will government review the take-up of relevant CPD and promote the use of educative -- Add up toolkit.

Standard teaching assessment unintentional disadvantaged dyscalculiac pupils because of the sheer volume of content and getting the right answer fast. Research suggests the best methods to teach dyscalculiac pupils have no place in the classroom for typical learners. They take time, focus on fundamentals and often involve revisiting material the wider class covered years earlier. Signing of teaching assistants to work one-to-one on what the others are learning en masse is unlikely to work. The TA may well not be aware of dyscalculia and just trying hard is not the answer to a learning difficulty.

But perhaps the biggest barrier to dyscalculiac learners is maths GCSE which functions as a gatekeeper. To A-levels, to all manner of degree courses, and even to careers in the Armed Forces. In 2024, 40% of students in England failed maths GCSE and at reset, 80% failed again. This dispiriting cycle of repeated failure impacts mental health and creates barriers to opportunity that may even breach the 2010 Equality Act. The case for reform has been made by the OCR exam board and the science and technology committee of this House.

Will government listened to growing calls to introduce accessible alternatives to mass qualifications that focus instead on functional skills and real-world numeracy? In repeatedly highlighting differences with dyslexia, I'm not suggesting one condition be prioritised over another, rather that research and understanding of dyscalculia likes 30 years behind. Will government commit to closing the funding gap between dyslexia and dyscalculia? And will DfE move to collect differentiated data on specific learning difficulties so we can see dyscalculia prevalence and cooccurrence? We can't know what we don't measure.

Over the last two years I've come to suspect that dyscalculia suffers because of a societal acceptance of poor numeracy we would not countenance illiteracy. We just never accept a child can learn to read and write, and yet being bad at maths it's seen as normal. Literacy and numeracy are equally important life chances but literacy is so often prioritised, indeed the new teacher training framework has multiple mentions of literacy and nothing on numeracy. And its deeply ironic to offer successive governments point to the successive governments point to the importance of STEM while failing to grasp the U.K.'s stubborn problem with low numeracy which affects over half the population.

And it's against this backdrop that dyscalculiac children must try to have their needs identified, understood and met. Some have the great fortune of supportive parents or a teacher who gets it. Others do not. And even where there is support, we should not underestimate the isolation, stress and anxiety of learning with dyscalculia. I don't doubt the intentions of government or the commitment of schools and teachers, but unless steps are taken to increase awareness and understanding of dyscalculia among policymakers, educators and the wider community, dyscalculiac learners will continue to have the odds stacked against them.

17 years ago the government office for science recommended that because of its low profile and high impact, dyscalculia should be raised as a government priority. The government then and governments since Apple failed to ask. So ask the noble Lady the Minister, well this Government the one that makes the difference?
21:08
Baroness Thornton Portrait Baroness Thornton (Labour)
-
-
I'm very pleased to be taking part in today's debate for two reasons. First, the personal reasons which I have to say after 27 years and your Lordship's House I haven't actually anticipated I would talk about, but I failed my maths eye level 4 times. And still managed to get enough A-levels including in economics to be accepted at the London School of economics and political science. On reflection I seem to have not had problems with concepts but I did have problems with numbers.

The lack of a maths O level means that today I wouldn't even take my A-levels let alone be admitted to the London School of economics. When I was a government minister, I did occasionally tell my officials any numbers I had to speak that were important needed to be put in words as well as numbers as they did have a tendency, and still do, to reverse them. Telephone numbers are a particular issue. A close member of my family has long been diagnosed with dyscalculia as well as dyspraxia.

The two often going together. And I had a maths teacher from the age of 11 whose job it was to get through the maths GCSE with success, but this of course is not open to most families. Second, I think the noble Baroness, her article in the House magazine in March absolutely hit the spot. My honourable friend emeritus Professor Brian Butterworth is of course one of the founding fathers of the modern approach to mathematical publishing. His expertise and his colleagues in this area mean we are all very well briefed indeed.

This is a timely debate and one which I hopefully push the policy agenda forward. The priority here is the noble Lady Baroness's has explained this to seek recognition for those who struggle with maths in the same way that we recognise the importance of support for children who have speech and language delay and those who are dyslexic. And this recognition needs to be built into our SEND programs. I think I need reassurance from my noble friend the Minister that the neurodivergent task and finish group established by her department to provide advice and recommendations on how best to meet the needs of neurodivergent children and young people within mainstream education settings seemed at the outset not to include children with speech and language development challenges and most relevant to this debate, children with developmental dyscalculia.

Can my Noble Friend assure the House that this issue has been remedied? The noble Lady Baroness Bull has explained I thought very eloquently what dyscalculia is. And surely the fact that this affects the numeracy skills of between four to 7% of children reduces the probability of achieving five or more good GCSEs. Significantly reduces educational life chances and highlight the inequality faced by this cohort. Of children, young people and adults, and it's very important. It requires the government to do several things.

Unfortunately, much of the research and work has already been undertaken. For example in 2020, the paper understanding current support systems and technology led interventions for specific learning difficulties draws together for the government's office of science at the time a series of four rapid evidence informed reviews to inform a project further the Council of science and technology and explores how technology and research can help improve educational outcomes for learners with specific learning difficulties, including dyscalculia. The proposal for action in this paper and many other documents provide a good pathway for dealing with this challenge.

Does my Noble Friend the Minister recognise the need to give developmental dyscalculia legal status as well as an official definition in the UK? Will the government be developing policy framework from which action can flow? Action like teacher training, special needs assessments, advice for parents, to name just one or two. And is there any consideration given to this issue in the SEND review taking place at the moment? As described by the noble Lady Baroness Bull. Raising awareness of this condition, as dyscalculia day is to do, is create an environment in which all children are given the support they need and deserve to fill their potential and live the life they want to lead.
21:13
Lord Hampton Portrait Lord Hampton (Crossbench)
-
-
It's always a pleasure to follow the noble Lady Baroness Thornhill, and like everyone here I would like to thank Noble Friend Baroness Bull for her strenuous efforts to get this important topic debated, and very thought-provoking opening speech. As ever, I must declare an interest that I still teach weekly at a state secondary school in Hackney. I'm actually a teacher of maths. 15% of the design technology curriculum is maths-based. And I have to admit I didn't know much about dyscalculia before researching this.

And there is an irony here that dyslexia is difficult to spell and dyscalculia is tricky to say. What is it about these learning disabilities that we have to give them such complicated names? I'm told it rhymes with Julia. So have to keep remembering that. At school I talked to the head of SEND and was told we assess for dyslexia but not dyscalculia. There are concerns, if there are concerns about dyscalculia, which are rarely reported and usually flagged by parents, as opposed to teachers, then we usually advise that they self refer through their GP.

In maths, students are placed in sets according to their year six scores and then additional support is given according to need. But then we have a problem. According to the recent letter from House of Lords science and technology committee, the Secretary of State for education, " The government is failing to recruit as many maths teachers as it has targeted for over a decade. And a missed half of all secondary schools needing to use nonspecialist teachers for maths as part of a wider shortage in STEM graduates going into teaching and being Once you have nonspecialist teachers teaching maths, there will be inevitably a drop in the level of help for those that struggle most in maths.

And the dyscalculia network is stock. In recent published data around public education, 55% of prisoners who lack a mass qualification had a learning difficulty confirmed in their initial screening. Once identified, these people often went on to obtain mass qualifications, ranging from interim level through to level II. The experienced success. The issue is not in prison education. The problem sits in a lack of recognition in maths learning difficulties in previous educational settings. I returned to the House of Lords technology committee.

Our witnesses argued that the rigid focus on obtaining a grade 4 at GSE in the current educational system disadvantages many students. There is an argument for the creation of widely recognised criteria based functional mathematics qualification in the UK that allows school leavers and adult learners alike to mathematics required for further study or through expanding and formalising existing criteria based numeracy qualifications. This is actually what I teach in design technology, both at GCSE and at A- level.

All the maths problems are based on real-world product design issues. The amount of varnish needed to coat a table. The destinations of a product to save material or the amount of sheet-metal that you would have to order for production work. This means that even though students who find mass boring or difficult can see how the maths will help them in their design. Different from a student that finds maths difficult or even impossible, facing a double GCSE maths lesson on a Monday morning.

The maths curriculum needs to change. I have long argued that children should be taught how to build and populate a spreadsheet in year six, they would love it and see the point to it, rather than fearing Excel, as most adults do. The dyscalculia network again says all citizens need foundational mathematical skills and general quantitative literacy for daily life, including personal finance, general employment. We need mathematics curricula to set people up for life and tools to support those that struggle.

By insisting on a rigid maths curriculum, we are feeling not only those dyscalculia but many types of neuro diversity. Anyone that thinks vaguely different from the norm. from the norm.
21:19
Baroness Coffey Portrait Baroness Coffey (Conservative)
-
-
When I saw a debate about special educational needs and also dyscalculia I thought wow, what a wonderful combination here. Also, I recognise that the Noble Lady who introduced the debate today was kind enough to recognise the desires of my right honourable friend when he introduced the multiply scheme. Unfortunately, the funding has ended for that, but I think it was a genuine attempt to recognise that numeracy is not all about getting A-levels but it was really important to help them prosper in this country were not only in their own lives but also productivity that has been referred to.

I have not heard of this before, but I think it has long been recognised that people, to some extent, do reach a certain level in their capabilities. But, as has already been eloquently said, we do not just assume that as people do not grasp things straight away if you do not try to help them in that regard, as has been pointed out about can you actually work out whether something is a square or not, and it has to be said that sometimes it feels that part of our education are looking for differentiation that quite rightly trying to recognise that there are different ways of learning can be quite a struggle for putting together a lesson plan, but it is important that teachers do that.

And I value what had happened in my childhood and what I see in schools in different parts of the country. It is good, actually, to see the Minister, the noble Baroness lady having been a council leader, not only the statutory duties she had but also has considerable knowledge of how to be practical in how we help children reach their full potential, and recognise some of the challenges that special educational needs, how that is being mainstreamed and how wonderful it can be addressed.

And I am very delighted also to see my Noble Friend Baroness Barran because she and I discussed a particular matter regarding the future of special needs schools in Suffolk. Going back to these challenges about numeracy, I was also struck by what that Noble Lord Hampton said about nonspecialist teachers and teaching CDT, I think he said. I must admit, did actually find the numbers very easily when I was a child and when I got to A-level it started getting a bit complicated and it was only when I went to university and I had a tutor that I actually got the whole concept of mechanics and I wish I had had that rather than the specialist maths teacher who however they tried on my sixth form I just could not grab that concept on some of the points, so I think there is an element of what he suggests that using practical solutions or practical examples is a good way to engage people who do not necessarily follow just the traditional way of learning.

I was also struck by what Baroness Thornton said about I think it was her fourth attempt past her own novel, I assume it would be, I know she's been graceful to the Noble Lady, but I think there is something here about what it is that we do in setting qualifications. Certainly, one of the challenges we went through this in quite a lot of detail when we would try to get people back into work particularly after COVID that when we are engaging with employers that routine job descriptions we would normally have two things.

Everybody had to have a driving licence and everybody had to have GCSE English and maths and quite regularly I would say why? That job does not need you to drive and that job does not need you, you may need to be numerate and do other things, but does it really require things, but does it really require you to have a specific qualification? And that is why what the Noble Lord Hampton refers to in terms of convocations, I think they have been developed, by the way, to have a practical qualification that is equivalent to a GCSE has been developed, and that is a good thing, that is an issue to stress.

One of the things that I am conscious about is that there has been a significant increase in awareness of children with special needs, educational needs, and we have been through a variety of phases of what has then happened about schools, they are just schools, as far as I am concerned, ideally agreed to teach every child in that community. About how we try to accommodate those children who do not fit norms, as has already been adequately said. The vast majority of people in this country really struggle with anything to do with maths beyond the basic GCSE, so that is why we should be reconsidering how we continue to support the teaching that is available, particularly, I would say, in primary school, not just in secondary school, thinking about how we build those foundations and why I we build those foundations and why I hope the Noble Lord will reconsider aspect of something like the multiply program in recognising the opportunities that will bring and the prosperity for all.

I turn, finally, to situations in Suffolk. And one of the things that is certainly clear is that I do respect that this current Government has two assist programs, but one of the things in the town where I live, the school that had acquired a specialist interest in special educational needs was also the physical and the situation ended up being that it was just not viable quite in the way that it was but my noble friend's Baroness Barran degree after careful consideration, working with officials, that the school should be a specialist school.

There is another one in Felixstowe run by the same trust and it is my huge disappointment that while that closed in the summer of last year, it was quite a lot of deliberation about whether a new school needed to be built on the site but there was a clear intention that a school would be ready to be open this coming September. I am sad to say that such a school, and I did pose a question to them, the Department for Education on this, still considering this and there are a lot of children that desperately need some specialist support as well as children in neighbouring schools and I really encourage the Minister to take back from this debate my concern about the children in East Suffolk and hope that under the school site to provide for those children that desperately needed.

children that desperately needed.
21:26
Baroness O'Loan Portrait Baroness O'Loan (Crossbench)
-
-
I would like to thank the noble Baroness for bringing this debate before your Lordships tonight. I think it is important. As we have heard, this is profoundly a difficult condition which has many different consequences for a child that suffers from it and, in many cases, is accompanied by other conditions such as dyslexia or DCD as that is sometimes called and I would just like to concentrate in my few minutes for a moment on the impact of some of the less well- known consequences of dyspraxia.

Dyspraxia is often described as clumsiness, or, more specifically, the inability to control fine motor movements, for example, a cup of tea can't be brought to his mother child without spilling it or whose handwriting looks very tidy and is difficult to decipher and sometimes bits of the words of missing. The United States and different learning disability says that dyspraxia can interfere in virtually all areas of a child's life, social, academic, athletic, pragmatic. Difficulty with fine motor integration affects a child's reading, organisation on paper, ability to transition between a worksheet or a keyboard or other necessary information which is different from a number line, graph, chart or computer screen.

Dyspraxia is caused by neurological difficulties which disrupt the usual pattern, so that messages from the brain transmitted in a disordered way, often leading to major difficulties, particularly in the classroom. Children may suffer from audio and visual processing disorders stop children with dyspraxia are often highly dyspraxia are often highly intelligent and the develop coping strategies. Let me give you an example. A little child with dyspraxia, does not necessarily hear what is said to her or the manner in which the sentence is spoken if a teacher says four things, the child may hear open your book, look for the words which are nouns.

Because of the condition, they may be incapable of receiving and restoring the end of the instructions, draw a circle around each noun, then look for the adjectives and do the same thing. What often happens then is that the child asks the person sitting next to them what the teacher said. The child would tell them may be fully, maybe not, then the child cannot do the work properly, so they have to ask again, or maybe look at what the other child is actually doing to make sense of what they are being asked to do.

In many cases, such children are described as disruptive, lacking attention, and possibly having ADHD. A child knows they are not capable of doing what is asked of them and they can become very discouraged, affecting their whole educational progress. The child may be able to read a book, but dyspraxia can affect the ability to read from a whiteboard or a blackboard and the child could be simply unable to understand what is on the board and what they are being asked to do there.

And for some children, dyspraxia is a company by dyscalculia, for others, by dyslexia and, for some, both. Imagine, my Lords, if you were a little child sitting in the classroom where what is going on is shrouded in mystery, confusion, and incompleteness. The dyspraxia foundation reports that children with dyspraxia are less likely than their peers to achieve five or more grades at GCSE grade 9 to four and the link between qualifications and earning potential is very well-known to all of us.

Parents seeking helpful eventually want to acquire an EHCP, an educational healthcare plan formal statement and that is a long and difficult process. If the child is given an EHCP it will specify what is required and the funding may even put not always be provided to the school. The problem for many parents is accessing a diagnosis of these conditions. A child can wait years to see an educational psychologist, a paediatrician, an occupational therapist. I ask the noble Baroness the Minister plans the Government has for improving access to diagnostic facilities, and thereby enhancing the experience for children with these difficulties, children with these difficulties, Occupational Therapy is key to providing help, and identifying the impact of the condition on each child for top but a recent survey by the Royal occasional therapists the Royal occasional therapists showed 86% of therapists reported a demand for services and people presenting more complex needs because of the delayed interventions.

This is another regrettable example of our failing and broken healthcare provision. What plans has the noble Baroness the Minister to enhance the level of provision, even getting a private assessment is very expensive, around £900 around London may be £1000 inside London. Teachers need additional resources and very often those not available. Inclusive teach.com give a list of ways to improve the learning experience of children with dyspraxia. They include adapting your teaching methods, breaking down tasks into whole steps so that children with dyspraxia can remember and work through them, providing additional time, using assistive technologies such as speech to text software, encouraging peer support, providing peer bodies to give assistance with tasks et cetera.

And probably most importantly, promoting self-esteem and emotional well-being so the child isn't frustrated and doesn't lack confidence because of their difficulties. And celebrating their achievements and helping them understand that everyone has difficulties and challenges in life. Much work has been done to identify processes which will assist the child to realise their full potential. Often the adjustments are not very costly. But the recognition of the problem and the identification of its impact on a child is hard to access.

Left unassisted, these children may even abandon education. Help, they can achieve much. Increasing provision for helping children is not only an investment in their future but may well enable them to make the contribution to society of which

**** Possible New Speaker ****

needs. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the noble Lady Baroness Bull for securing this Baroness Bull for securing this important debate this evening. But more importantly, making me aware of the many challenges that thousands the many challenges that thousands of schoolchildren suffer from every
21:33
Lord Mott Portrait Lord Mott (Conservative)
-
-
of schoolchildren suffer from every single day. I'm taking part in this debate today not only as a parent but also as someone who has dyslexia. And I was wondering whether I should make a concession, but I think after Baroness Thornton's confession a little bit earlier on, I only managed to take my GCSE maths exam three times, so I never quite managed to get to the fourth occasion. But who knows? In later life I may decide to take GCSE maths for 1/4 time.

The challenges that I faced in my early days at school when I spent time at what was described at the time as a special class, it was Birrell during experience and one was confusing. I'm very pleased to say that since then, special educational needs have changed for the better. The experience I faced growing up helped me understand my eldest daughter's journey as she is dyslexic. I was able to see the early signs and help support her. The confusion, frustration and the quiet resilience needed to thrive in an education system that was not built with her in mind.

But I've also seen what happens when support is in place. Her confidence grew, her ability shone through, and the label of difficulty becomes a gateway to understanding. Much of the support came from her parents. Often forgotten in the journey but in my view, fundamental. That journey taught me something deeply personal. Difference does not need to mean disadvantage, but only if it is recognised and supported. Today I want to turn to the specific learning difficulty that affects the ability to understand numbers.

And carry out basic arithmetic. It is often described as the mathematical equivalent of dyslexia. Yet in terms of awareness and support, it lags far behind as we heard this evening. And it's the awareness and support that I want to focus on today. I can say now to the noble Baroness the Minister I am not going to be asking for huge amounts of extra money but perhaps one or two suggestions that may just start to make a difference to children, families and our communities.

Up to 6% of the population may be affected, roughly one child in every single classroom, but it remains under identified, misunderstood as we've heard this evening already, and rarely provided for. Although the send code of practice recognises in practice many teachers are trained to spot it as before you heard in this debate. We must ensure that initial teacher training and ongoing professional development includes strategies for recognising and supporting children. The awareness now common with dyslexia must be extended to mathematical learning difficulties.

Parents often face lengthy delays in assessing assessments, or they are told their child struggled to answer might they answer be enough to qualify. In some areas no assessment is available at all. This is totally unacceptable. I recently had the pleasure of meeting a company based in West London delivering EHCP tools to local authorities in the SEND and education space. The tool brings together insights from professional reports, analyses them using AI and drafts personalised high quality EHCP plans, cutting down the time spent on manual writing and giving SEND teams more capacity to focus on children and families.

Educational technology can play a key role. Tools now exist that help detect related problems and Taylor learning to each child. These platforms can flag issues early before a child reaches crisis point and offer multi- sensory scaffold it tools to approach. Schools need training to use these effectively. Sadly many parents are left to navigate the system alone. With inconsistent advice and little clarity. We need better signposting, clearer communication from schools, and consistent local support. Parents must be seen as partners, not obstacles in the process of identifying and meeting children's needs.

But in supporting parents with more information, I do believe we can start to make a real difference. It was my own experience that helped me support my daughter, but many others around were able to understand. Awareness takes the pressure away from our schools and our teachers. They must play a key role, but I really want parents and grandparents to understand how they cannot only support but understand the signs and start the early intervention that is required at home. Awareness is the foundation of change.

Without it, this problem remains invisible to educators, policymakers and too often, to the policymakers and too often, to the children themselves. A survey in 2023 which we thought you had mentioned of UK teachers highlights the problem that over 40% were not familiar or slightly familiar. Compare that to dyslexia, where just 15% were in the same position. This is not a surprise, as awareness around dyslexia is strong. In fact I'm looking forward to attending an event tomorrow evening that Channel 4 are hosting to hear more about jelly all of us struggle with dyslexia.

We must be in a position going forward, and I look forward to Baroness Bull perhaps hosting an event next year with Channel 4 where perhaps we could invite Bill Gates, Robbie Williams or perhaps even share. But as I get the end of my remarks, urge the government to support a national awareness campaign in partnership with educational charities and neurodiverse advocates. This could include training for all school staff, public information materials, visibility and leadership level. -- At leadership level.

Let's give teachers the tools that parents have, and with understanding comes opportunity for the let's offer both

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to every child in every classroom. Hi join others in thanking the
21:40
Baroness Hunt of Bethnal Green Portrait Baroness Hunt of Bethnal Green (Crossbench)
-
-


**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hi join others in thanking the noble Baroness Baroness Bull for securing this debate, and her relentless efforts to raise relentless efforts to raise awareness and understanding of this most overlooked of subjects, which I share some of the difficulties in pronouncing that I will do my best, dyscalculia. I'd like to refer to my register of interests, declared by King's College in 10 PhD student George became a maths teacher for over a decade, Tommy about his experience of what may help and I reflect his views on this contribution.

When considering this debate I was shocked to discover that despite dyscalculia being as common as dyslexia, dyslexia is 100 times more likely to be diagnosed. I'm dyslexic, and I was lucky. I went into a small room with a lovely woman who tried to teach me to juggle. We did things differently in Wales. And I remember the matter- of-fact way it was established in my reading up and down a page rather than across, difficulty following a sequence of instructions, my ongoing sequence of instructions, my ongoing need to hold my left hand up in an ill shape to Mr Duddridge which was left was something that simply indicated I worked in a particular way.

My love of stories brought into my vocabulary said the apparent problem I have with simple word recognition was alleviated. Old English posed some challenges in my first year as an undergraduate but I suspect they were exacerbated by the access to a subsidised bar that came into my life at the same time. My point is that a diagnosis of dyslexia was helpful. It helped me, my teachers and my parents alter their approach to my learning. And it meant I didn't lose my confidence when I take a different route to get to the same place as my peers.

And I suspect that lack of stigma around dyslexia that existed for perhaps my generation has led to some of the creative solutions we've seen around dyslexia. My computer is well equipped with different packages that enable me to type and read things in a different way. I've had acetates to layover things since I was quite young. The same innovation hasn't happened around dyscalculia. It's clear from what we heard so far in this debate that the woefully inadequate diagnosis of dyscalculia is exacerbated the lifelong exclusion that children can experience if the challenges are simply dismissed as ineptitude.

As Baroness Bull has orally referred, my clever PhD student George explained to me that mass is hierarchical. Unlike other subjects, each topic builds on foundational skills. Missing even a short period of instruction can prevent future learning. Find long division in primary school utterly baffling, the quadratic equations that come in your rate will be a complete mystery. Failure builds on failure. A simple diagnosis, a shift in approach as a result can help children. Instead as with her children feel in -- incapable and feel they are useless and are ruled out of careers because of it.

The pressure on teachers is immense and requests for additional training seemed never ending. But it does seem that even a most cursory introduction to dyscalculia would be of benefit to pupils and teachers. Support early diagnosis and help restore confidence to those pupils who are rolling themselves out at a young age. In 10 years as a maths teacher, George has never received any statutory training on dyscalculia. It's also clear that the transition from primary school to secondary school creates another risk for pupils.

Research conducted by Glencross and Wallen in their study of 2020 on transitions from primary to secondary school found the informal personal knowledge about individual learning support is often lost, which can be especially challenging for students with neurodiverse conditions. I do wonder whether there was an opportunity presented by the proposed introduction of the single unique identifier proposed in the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. The government are rightly taking care to think about what data should be saved and shared about children, but it's perhaps possible that sharing information about neurodiversity, including dyscalculia can help schools support children to keep working through this mathematical hierarchies, even if they change schools.

I hope that the noble Baroness ball achieves her aim of achieving it be a widely known issue. But it's clear that some simple arrangements can make a significant difference to young people in this country. people in this country.
21:45
Lord Shinkwin Portrait Lord Shinkwin (Conservative)
-
-
I congratulate the noble Baroness Baroness Bull. This debate. And I also think of educating us. I have to confess that I had never heard of dyscalculia before preparing for tonight's debate. The excellent briefings produced by the library and the dyscalculia network, if they are anything to go by, I'm in good company. I relate to the issue on two levels. Both personal. Firstly, as a disabled pupil today, I would properly be assessed for SEND support.

As a child in the '70s, and 80s, such provision was not available. At least not to my What was not so much available as expected was that all disabled children should be sent to special schools and segregated. I mean no criticism for special schools, but I always remember my mother who spent a lifetime in teaching being horrified when the headmaster of one particular special school boasted that they yeah before a pupil had achieved one CSE.

My limited time at that special school and I had to use a wheelchair full-time following yet another fracture made an indelible impression on me. Even as a 10- year-old, I was aware of the low expectations. It was just assumed that disability was assumed with underachievement. Indeed, the title underachievement. Indeed, the title of the noble Baronesses article children have been let down for too long, could until recently have applied to children with disabilities generally. They were let down by the system.

Helping children with SEN realise their potential simply did not come into the equation. I like to think that the aspiration which informs substitutes then has been challenged by teachers and SEN coordinator has now. And I would like to put on record the recognition that they do incredibly important work, and I take this opportunity to thank them for responding to what at the end of the day and I know from my parents a day in the classroom is often demanding.

Has to be a rotation, ultimately a good teacher and says to help shape a child's future and instil in them a belief that they make a worthwhile contribution to life, especially from school, secondary, in Latin O-levels and just in maths. And my maths teacher had so much confidence in my innate ability with figures that this would enter my four both O-level and GCSE. I script a pass but obviously they were not taking any chances, so like the noble Baronesses nieces my heart sank when the previous Prime Minister made the claim of his plan for all children to study maths beyond GCSE.

My own experience, and I believe the experience of other noble Lords who have mentioned in this debate that however much we this debate that however much we would wish otherwise, our brains are wired differently and Matthew simply just not for everyone. There would appear to be a special place for children with dyscalculia. Some that really have struggled with anything at school and know what it is like to have one's confidence undermined, both because of the talks and living with a disability and, specifically, because of finding maths so challenging.

I hate to think of how much one in 20 children with dyscalculia must or how much they are suffering and it is being compounded unnecessarily. Of course, teachers and centres are not to teachers and centres are not to blame if they are well aware, but surely the noble Baroness has made support and particularly in the mandatory training in dyscalculia for teachers. And may I ask the Minister one question, does she agree with me that these children actually need to be taught that dyscalculia is not their fault? And that they do have potential worth realising? It seems to me and I suspect two other contributors to this debate that there life choices depend on it.
21:51
Lord Tarassenko Portrait Lord Tarassenko (Crossbench)
-
-
My Lords, I also congratulate my Noble Friend for securing this debate and for making such a strong case for action in just under 10 minutes. On Monday we released the final report on the project which we have had the privilege of chairing for the last eight months of this project has taken an in-depth look at the curriculum and assessment with a view to informing the government's review chaired by Professor the abilities of children in our schools for any characteristic follows the distribution better known as a bell-shaped curve.

In the project or aim has been to try to identify strategies to help not only those in the top two for mathematical ability but also those in the bottom two for mathematical ability but also those in the bottom 220%, those who would have failed to get a grade 4 in maths GCSE even after multiple resets. Our second recommendation we believe will help both groups. It is as follows, balancing content above primary to low secondary allowing more time for knowledge to be secured when it is first introduced.

Giving more time to teachers to focus on core concepts in early primary school would provide children with the opportunity to develop and embed the foundations they need. A better balance of content between upper primary and lower secondary would also enable high attain is not to become bored or to lose interest in maths in Key stage III, as often happens today. Much of the current teaching focuses on revisiting key stage II content. The main benefit, however, was the first those children that struggle with fanatics more general cognitive reasons.

Although, it is unlikely to be sufficient for children with severe number processing difficulties and we waited long to introduce the word dyscalculia but we did define the group as a special group in our project. Three numbers kept coming up in this debate. The prevalence of about 5% for this number it is likely there is at least one child with dyscalculia in every class of 30, although the prevalence of dyscalculia is similar to that of dyslexia, a child with dyscalculia is 100 times, that is the third number, probably the most shocking, 100 times less likely to be diagnosed.

But it is encouraging to be able to look at some recent progress here. A member of the executive group for the Horizons project from Loughborough University has been part of the working group developing an up-to-date evidence- based dyscalculia diagnosis methodology. This was released in March this year, but specific learning difficulties Assessment Standards Committee. This enables a solution to the issue of diagnosis but does not deliver it as there is a lack of suitable training for the cochlear assessment.

Most assessment training courses leading to an approved qualification focuses on literacy skills and the diagnosis of dyslexia with very limited content on mathematics. I would urge the Noble Lady the Minister to intervene to ensure that approved qualification is also include dyscalculia. Another recommendation of the maths Horizon project would increase the likelihood of diagnosis, and the fourth recommendation is to introduce, and I quote again, the low stakes gateway for fundamental knowledge to be administered nationally and specified points in new knowledge progression maps.

Key stage I would allow teachers to identify at an early-stage those children who are struggling to grasp foundational concepts in mathematics. It is between the ages of five then that the diagnosis could be made. We should acknowledge, of course, as has been pointed out, the problems will persist even with high quality specialist intervention following the diagnosis. And it child with dyscalculia reaches secondary school, the intervention strategies could include apps which run either on a smart phone or a computer tablet.

It was my pleasure to meet some people with this cochlear earlier on in the cafeteria and someone told me that they do use apps to help. The project team was broadly in favour of digital tools for education. Provided these are introduced in the classroom in the right way and at the right time and carefully sequenced progression. There are plenty of apps if you look on the web to help children with dyscalculia that can then be downloaded from the Apple store or the Google play store, but only those with high quality and evidence-based should be used.

A simple measure which the Department for Education could take would be to establish the working group to make recommendations to help parents and teachers identify suitable apps. We have made huge progress in the last 20 years as we have heard diagnosing and supporting people with dyslexia. A child would discuss cochlear to thrive early identification is also likely to be crucial. Low stakes gateway checks helping to spot those in need with enough up-to-date assessment. This role require one or two teachers in the school to be sent on training courses to gain an approved qualification that focuses on dyscalculia.

Simple low-cost intervention strategies can help at primary level those children that have had a diagnosis before they are supplemented or replaced by evidence-based digital tools secondary level. It is no time for children with dyscalculia to be given the same opportunities to progress through the education system as children with dyslexia. system as children with dyslexia.
21:58
Lord Addington Portrait Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat)
-
-
I stand up and the first thing should do is declare my interest, as president of the Association. Also chairman of a company that deals with assistive technology. So, having done that, the next thing is to welcome two more members to the Mafia of misspelling. We would take over the world, but one of done that name when we got the first conspiracy wrong and the other will misread it, so comparatively we can see it for a bit. But, also, the Baroness when she started this put her finger absolutely on why it is important.

The gateway subject to progress in this country are GCSE, maths, and English. And this has been a drive for much of the recent education policy. If we ignore that, education policy. If we ignore that, you would know that reality, you are not going to get anywhere. The fact that we are now moving back towards practice and Lord Hampton mentioned this, more practical base, knowledge-based, relevant knowledge-based subjects, and everything he said about maths for being practical study has been sent to me about English.

Everything he said then. So, it may have been, I am sorry that you have got friends out. We have got, and also the fact that I thought I was in the first person to speak about technology. Maps. No, summary has beaten me also. I am not sure whether this is irritating or reassuring, loads, but there is a degree of consensus here. We have to work around this problem. If we still take these two subjects as roadblocks we are going to have problems.

It is also fair to say in our society that it has been more acceptable to be bad at maths than bad at English. And if we think about it as a gateway subject, one that you used to be able to get that you used to be able to get around, despite, it does not matter, and the centres kicked in there with the fact that we do not spot girls as easily with special educational needs because they tend to handle the classroom better and do not kick-off as much, but all of these are reasonably accepted factors.

But to deal with this, if we accept that actually you need education going on, we have to start taking the maths side of this more seriously. And the first thing the Government could do is recognise that dyscalculia is the appropriate word or come up with another one. Because it is not recognised at the moment. That is a small change, if the noble Baroness can say that in her answer, I would be very helpful. But I would I would be very helpful.

But I would And if you think it doesn't matter, I will take you to a conference of dyslexia, but the BTA actually does cover dyscalculia and some of its website and does work there. So we website and does work there. So we are not all bad. If we are going through this, and it's not often I say that we've come across as the big bad bully who gets all the attention. If you are going down to this conference, and we got to the create bane of the education system, lawyers making presentations about how you get your education health care plan.

This is at the start of the process because we need them to fight through. And this lawyer said no, you don't need that because dyscalculia is a special educational maths problem, and he went on for about half an hour. And of course everybody is going to learn that aren't they? So one word really would help. And it's not dyscalculia because I thought I had problems with pronunciation, but it would appear that I have cracked this one and others haven't.

Could we come up with another one? Or a better definition because actually knowing and having a reference point will help. Because you will know something to refer back to. And saying it's dyslexia with numbers doesn't help. Because I don't think it's come out yet, but as it was explained to me, the concept of mathematics is something that you find very difficult. The idea of the difference between one and many and the things that go in between and problems about counting back you can't do.

Everything has to start again. You don't get that concept. And although the government have made this wonderful statement that every teacher is a teacher of special educational needs, if they don't know what they are doing, I wish they weren't. Because they have already failed in these two basic lessons. Let's stick with English and maths. If you've already failed in a classroom and you get more of the same help, you will get more failure. Remember that, we need specific help for it.

We won't use the same apps, the same teaching techniques. We have to address that. So if we are going to have this wonderful change to this wonderful every teaching special every -- everyone teaching special educational needs, where is the training and the focus? Training to do no harm? Let's borrow from medicine. Let's get it out of there. Let's not impound failure. And I thought I was going to make a joke about saying that it only took me three times to pass maths and my was only a CSE let's forget about it.

You've got to actually think about how you address this problem properly. It isn't more of the same. It is an try harder. I'm very glad nobody has said that in here. And as the Noble Lord put it, it's about expectation. Make sure you move the barrier to allow someone to have realistic expectation. I didn't say anything about dyspraxia but we will save that for another day. Making sure the teachers know what they are doing is the first step.
22:04
Baroness Barran Portrait Baroness Barran (Conservative)
-
-
It's a pleasure to speak in this debate so ably introduced by the noble Baroness Lady Bull who rightly brings the House as attention to the important issues of SEND in general and dyscalculia in particular. And maths of course is a vital area for securing economic growth, and I just like to pay tribute also to the work done by the maths Horizon project check -- in the age of AI. Nationally we have seen great progress in recent years and our international rankings the maths being a top country outside Southeast Asia, and with a market improvement in the last 30 years in the standard pass rate for maths at GCSE to around 80% by the age of 19.

But when we turn to the wider issues facing children with special educational needs and disabilities, the situation is much less rosy. The system we have created to respond to children with SEND is a product of the Children and Families Act of 2014. And before the 2014 reforms, the SEND system was widely criticised for being fragmented, educational Health and Social Care operating separately in different silos. It was described as being bureaucratic and slow, parents suffering lengthy delays and it was very complicated to get any support.

Families felt disempowered and unable to input into decisions that affected their children. And this may Noble Friend Lord Shinkwin said, the system was slow in ambition. There was a culture of low expectations. So the act introduced as we know education health and care plans, support to the age of 25. The concept of coproduction with families. And the requirement of local authorities to publish comprehensive information about available SEND services. And I labour these points for two reasons. Firstly because we all know across this House that the system we have today is not working well, but it is a function of these reforms.

They look so sensible on paper and yet in practice they've created a set of incentives that ended up pointing in the wrong direction. And I dwell on this also because the government is currently debating the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, major reforms to safeguarding systems, and I know the government is planning to bring forward further reforms in relation to special educational needs. I think later this year. Maybe the noble Lady the Minister can confirm the timing of that.

So whether it's in relation to the broader reforms or whether it's in relation to specific interventions for dyscalculia, the importance that we test and pilot and really are confident and focus on implementation, the importance of that I think cannot be overstated. The noble Baroness Lady Bull has rightly focused this debate on the resources in schools to identify special educational needs and support students with a range of needs. And she mentioned some of the changes that were made under the last government to the early career framework and the support for early career teachers.

They were bolstered by an investment in early years SENCOs and a revised practical SENCO qualification, but some of the problems we still face go beyond those reforms, and I think there are two areas in particular that I would just like to touch on briefly. Firstly, most of the discretionary funding in the system is available for children with an education health care plan, and there is no real incentive for success for early intervention to support children with special educational needs and integrate them into mainstream education without an EHCP.

And we know that with the shortage of places in specialist schools which may Noble Friend Baroness Coffey referred to, that we need to be able to integrate more effectively and incentivise schools to deliver effective early intervention. And secondly, there is no equivalent of the national and clinical excellence when it comes to SEND, and I repeatedly told by school leaders that some of the proposed support that is suggested the children, including those with dyscalculia has literally no evidence base to support it.

But if it's on the plan, they have no choice but they have to deliver it. And all too often we see actually the lowest qualified members of staff in a school being allocated to a child with complex allocated to a child with complex needs. When actually they need much more specialist support, so I'd be grateful if the noble Lady the Minister could comment whether that is in the shopping list of things that the government might consider. In its reforms.

I would just like to echo enclosing some of the questions that have already been put by other Noble Lords in their speeches, whether the government will consider formal definition of dyscalculia and will respond to the noble Lady the Baroness Bowles call to track the incidents of cases and indeed the impact of interventions to support those children. As my Noble Friend Lord Shinkwin said, this is all about securing opportunity for children, something that across the House we can all support.
22:11
Baroness Blake of Leeds Portrait Baroness Blake of Leeds (Labour)
-
-
Can I begin of course by expressing my gratitude to the noble Baroness bowl for opening this important debate on supporting children generally with special educational needs and disabilities, and particularly tonight those with dyscalculia. I know she is a champion in this space. And for all those who have personal experience. And she has raised this on several occasions, and I think we can all thank her for that, and I know she is not going to give up either.

And she has identified herself as a real champion, and I'm sure there are many people who are grateful to her for that. Can I thank all Noble Lords you have contributed to the debate? I won't be able to respond everything in the short time that I have, but I do value the richness and particular the honesty from the lived experiences just to make these debates so real and so important. We are talking particularly about children, their progression into young people come into the world of work, into the adulthood.

And we should always keep that at the centre, absolute centre of everything that we do. And just referencing a couple of very quick points, Baroness O'Loan and self esteem, absolutely critical. The Noble Lords personal testimony. I think you've set something in motion there with a potential event in the future. Baroness Hunt on juggling. I think I'm going to keep that in my minds eye going forward. Certainly wouldn't have worked for me. I have to be honest on that.

Lord Shinkwin, thank you so much for your particular honesty about the experience with maths. And maths can be tough in so many different ways. And that whole issue of making sure we instil confidence and make young people realise that so many things are not their fault. And Lord Addington as always, additions to your Mafia. I know we will wait to hear with interest. I just want to be absolutely clear from the start that this whole area around SEND is absolute top priority for this government, and I hope the announcement that the government has been making has made that clear.

I think I appreciate the Baroness's honesty. I think we can all say that the SEND system is on its knees. And we have to be honest about that. Children's needs are not being met. Parents are forced into positions fighting the support. As a local authority leader, I know that only too well, and all the issues around funding that go with that. And be fitted at the centre of our Plan for Change, making sure that we restored the trust of parents.

And making sure that schools in particular have the tools to identify and support children before things get to a crisis point. We want to commit to ensuring excellence for everyone, and in every area we do, and nowhere could be more important than that. And I hope that that's appreciated and reflected in the extra funding that we have been able to put in this far, both for the teaching side and also the capital side, which of course is incredibly important. Our ambition is reflected, reflecting back the many reports that have highlighted the challenges facing the SEND system.

It's difficult for parents, carers and young people to navigate, and outcomes for children can be very poor, and please the education Select Committee is undertaking its own enquiry, which also is underscoring the significant challenges we face. But as I can repeat, a priority for the government, particularly that we want all children to receive the right support to succeed in their education and lead happier, healthier and productive lives. And can I reassure Baroness Coffey that special schools will always have a place in the system? I can't go into any detail about specifics.

There will be many. They are all of course being looked at and worked out in We know that it takes the whole school workforce to help young people and thrive in education and the whole range I mean from teaching assistants to support staff, special educational needs coordinator's, early years indicators, and as we have heard from the contributions allied health professionals. And investing to improve outcomes of experiences right across the country. And, of course, specific professional development training will be key to this and can I agree with Baroness Bull and my Noble Friend Baroness Thornton around the importance of early intervention.

Absolutely critical to prevent unmet needs from escalating. This is often referred to for early years educators, but early intervention with any problem as it arises is absolutely critical. We have to address emerging needs through the early guesswork, and we have launched new training resources to help support children with developmental differences, and we have announced further training places and targeting the most disadvantaged areas and around the national professional politicians generally to make sure they get the additional knowledge and skills that we need.

And we are supporting the kind of teaching that will support children with SEND, including those with dyscalculia. High quality teaching is absolutely critical, as we know. Recruiting and retaining expert teachers is absolutely fundamental. But we cannot get away from this which is why we are committed to recruiting an additional 6 1/2 thousand new expert teachers across those schools and in our colleges and across Parliament. And, as I have said, a range and ensuring they have the skills to support all pupils and can I stress including those with dyscalculia and I think it is one of those areas that is going to prefer the agenda as we talk about our general approach to SEND.

Thank you to the Noble Lord for sharing his experience in the important project that has been involved in. And just to mention that we are also funding that maths help program, the school network improving the teaching of mathematics for all pupils in publicly funded schools, and this includes training and making sure that learning is sequenced in a coherent manner. It makes sense to pupils. I think that is the thing that has come across and through that area could of understanding of the needs of children with calculi are going to be absolutely fundamental.

Lord Hanson raises the importance of maths in transition. And we need to make sure that we have got the appropriate online provisions as well. And the Baroness mentions again the point about qualifications and the curriculum assessment. That is happening in the review that we are undertaking that will come out in the autumn. We know that support given across the system is variable, we are well aware of this, and we want a consistent inclusive approach to supporting neurodivergent children and mainstream medication and that is why we are delivering the program, deploying specialist from both health and education workforces to up skill primary schools to support neurodivergent children and I hope answering the points raised by the Baroness alone and Lord Mott.

It is so important, the whole school approach, so it is not reliant on a specific diagnosis and I think that has come up several times and we have to recognise the supports and have to recognise the supports and the range of needs that are out there, so not waiting for a diagnosis and getting the early support in right across the system, effective early identification is absolutely key to this. And building on this our neurodivergent task unification group will be providing further insight on what provision and support in mainstream educational settings will look like within an inclusive system.

We have been gathering evidence from across the piece and I know that the professor, the Chair of the group, recently met stakeholders with lived experience and particularly representing those with dyscalculia and the network. Can I thank Lord Hampton, again, for his contribution to the teaching profession and his dedication? It is really important to be able to hear this. And just looking up the points we know in all of this drive to improve teaching, AI should be seen as a really valuable tool in helping us go forward.

I could see a lot more on the Curriculum and Assessment Review, but I know we will get other opportunities to move that forward. So, can I just respond to my Noble Friend, Baroness Thornton? And say that I agree with her analysis and that dyscalculia has not received same attention as dyslexia or those who struggle with speech and language and I also think that parents should not need to have their private capital build to be able to pay for specialist maths teachers and they should get the same support as a right.

And that is why we are investing in the school workforce to meet the needs of all the children, including those with neurodivergent's such as dyscalculia and investing our maths hub early intervention with the needs of children at the heart of it. I am very conscious that my time is coming to an end, but I would like to just recognise enclosing the debate that we must recognise those working across all of the systems in the interests of our children and young people and I think the knowledge and understanding of children with SEND is increasing.

I want to just reinforce the reason we are reforming the program, I can't be specific about when that will come, but it is urgent, that we want to make sure that we pull together as many lived experience children's voices at the heart of everything we do is another important aspect, but do is another important aspect, but I would like to express our commitment to our approach being rooted in partnership and all of our work being guided, making sure that front-line professionals, leaders, experts, listen to children and their families and work together for an integrated way forward.

We can only transform the outcomes of people and all young people with SEND if we listen and work together on solutions. Again, a special plea. We all know that effective early identification and intervention can reduce the impact of the special need or the disability in the long- term. There is so much evidence around this that we have all got an obligation to move forward, working within the community, improving inclusivity, and expertise so that we can move forward.

And again as well as the Noble Lord iPad like to pay tribute to those professionals who have worked tirelessly to help move things forward. We have several reviews coming forward and I know we all look forward with interest to make sure that our part of that interest is reflected in the reforms that we need to make in improving lives and improving the life chances of so many young people.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, identity move that the House do now adjourn.
22:31
None Portrait Oral questions: Implementing a code of practice under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019
-

22:31
22:32
None Portrait Oral questions: Implementing a code of practice under the Parking (Code of Practice) Act 2019
-

House House of House of Lords House of Lords - House of Lords - 4 House of Lords - 4 June House of Lords - 4 June 2025.
This debate has concluded
Return to start of debate - Return to top of page