Live Debate: Lords Chamber

Oral questions: Organisations consulted regarding the Equality and Human Rights Commission's Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations

My Lords, the Minister is following the process in the

11:23

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Equality Act 2006 and is consulting the Scottish and Welsh Ministers as set out in the Equality Act 2006. The EHRC operates independently of the government and is responsible the government and is responsible for drafting the code and consulting such persons as it consulting such persons as it thinks appropriate. It consulted on the code from the 2nd of October the code from the 2nd of October 2024 to the 3rd of January 2025, and again from 20th of May to the 30th of June 2025.

On updates to the code.

11:23

Lord Strasburger (Liberal Democrat)

- -

I thank the Minister for his reply. My Lords, by law, the reply. My Lords, by law, the Secretary of State has only two choices either lay the code before Parliament or send it back to the Ehrc. She has dithered for five months over this binary decision. About 11 pages that are at issue. My Lords, if kicking the can down the road were an Olympic sport, this government would be favourite for the gold medal. But my Lords, this is serious.

Thousands of organisations are desperately waiting for the code of practice to make sure they comply with the law. When will they get it?

11:24

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Well, let's be clear. The updated code was received on the updated code was received on the 4th of September. The draft updated code is undergoing review by policy code is undergoing review by policy and legal teams in the office for Equality and Opportunity. We are reviewing the code, the draft code, with the care it deserves. Any suggestion that the government is delaying the code is totally inaccurate and unhelpful.

11:25

Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench)

- -

My Lord. >> Labour in the good. >> We'll hear from crossbenchers next. >> Apologise. The Minister will be aware that organisations like the Women's Institute and Girlguiding have described their current difficulties arising from the draft code as costly and difficult. How will the government and the reduce anxiety about the code, so that organisations can act proportionately, inclusively and realistically, rather than facing an uncertain situation in which the main beneficiaries are lawyers and plumbers?

11:25

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Well, I think the noble Lord makes a very valid point. And the makes a very valid point. And the submitted its draft code to Ministers and we are reviewing it. As I said before, with the care it deserves, it's crucial that providers have legally robust guidance on how to apply the Equality Act, which is why we are considering the draft code properly. The code will have implications for service providers up and down the country. So it's important, vitally important that we get this right.

11:26

Lord Harper (Conservative)

- -

My Lords. Labour and. >> Conservative benches next. >> Chief Whip my Lords, the noble Lord, the Minister will remember that on the 2nd of February I asked that on the 2nd of February I asked him to confirm whether the government in all of the public services and functions that it delivers, was in full compliance with the law as set out by the Supreme Court. He gave an unequivocal one word answer and said absolutely. I tabled a written question the following day, asking him for the evidential basis for that assertion.

That question is now nearly ten days overdue, so this delay thing seems to be catching. Can I ask him when I'm going to get an answer to that question? And is he still prepared to stand by his assertion that the government is in full compliance with the law in all of the public services and functions that Ministers are responsible for delivering? Yeah.

11:27

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Well, I repeat my answer. Absolutely. And I also responded to Absolutely. And I also responded to the noble Lady Baroness Falkner, who actually asked a supplementary to the question. And I have taken the precaution of reading the letter that the CEO of Sex Matters got May a false poster, which actually sets out the reasons why we're reviewing the code. Obviously, the government is absolutely committed to complying with the law and the judgement of the Supreme Court. There's no doubt about that.

But what we want to do, as we're doing with the code, the EHRC code, is to review all policies, because the policy and the code is not just about one issue. It covers a whole range of protected characteristics. I mean, actually one of the people, people who are most concerned about the implications of this are people with disabilities. So I think we should be very, very careful of saying we must do something straight away. We are complying with the Supreme Court judgement and we're not going to deviate from that.

11:28

Baroness Brown of Silvertown (Labour)

- -

My Lords, in good law project >> My Lords, in good law project versus the EHRC, Mr. Justice Swift described the statutory framework described the statutory framework as providing a minimum requirement and not a ceiling. How will the government work with the EHR to ensure the code reflects that proportionality based structure? Yeah.

11:28

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Well. >> I think I thank my hon. Friend. I think the really important thing here, that's why we need to focus on getting this code right, because on getting this code right, because there are implications and there are implications for a whole range of other businesses and people up and down the country. And we have set out our expectations that service providers follow the law, as clarified by the For Women Scotland ruling, and seek specialist advice where necessary. But it is for that reason and that potential legal challenge, why we need to take time to get this properly right, so that the code can be adopted by everyone and be confident that they are following the law.

11:29

Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Crossbench)

- -

My Lord. of the government disingenuously arguing against its own regulator's interpretation of the law in the High Court this past November. Last week, well, on the 13th of February, those arguments were comprehensively defeated and EHRC unambiguously won the case on its interpretation in the interim update. Will they now come clean and say that they have no interest in defending women's rights and right to EHRC, as Lord Strasburger said, to say they will not lay the code, or at least lay it forthwith so that everyone can see the arguments contained in it.

11:30

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Well, I don't accept the premise >> Well, I don't accept the premise of the noble Lady at all. You know, we have a statutory duty. So does we have a statutory duty. So does the EHR. The EHRC is independent of the government, but the Secretary of State has an obligation to, as I think one of the noble Lords said, we either consider the code, reject it, or we accept it, but we are working with the EHRC to publish the code as speedily as possible.

But we want to avoid the very cases, whether it's the Good Law project or whether it's sex matters or somebody else. There's lots of legal cases going on, and it's the people on the ground that suffer as a consequence of this. So we want to get it right and we will do so. Yes, my Lords, there is nothing shabby about taking your time to get a consultation right that

11:31

Lord Cashman (Non-affiliated)

- -

affects so many people who face difficulties and are treated as difficulties and are treated as often inhuman minorities in this country. So therefore I say to my country. So therefore I say to my noble friend, the Minister, given that there are disputes across multiple settings, I'd like to ask multiple settings, I'd like to ask him when will the government consider it necessary to provide a clearer steer? Working with the clearer steer? Working with the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, rather than allowing proportionality to be defined incrementally through the courts, which I believe in the end, doesn't really help anyone.

Well.

11:31

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

I hear what my. understand his concerns. I don't think that it's a good practice to sort of have legal challenges. I mean, actually, you know, I mean, the they don't actually resolve anything. What will resolve things is to get the code accurately, robustly reviewed and properly published. And the updated code is undergoing, as I said, review by policy and legal teams in the Office of Equality and Opportunity. This is a long and lengthy and legally complex document which will have impact on service providers up and down the country and rightfully, rightfully, we are carefully considering.

It's crucial that providers have legally robust guidance on how to apply the Equality Act, which is why we're considering it very carefully.

11:32

Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)

- -

My Lords. >> You'd be quicker. We get the front benches in and then. >> There are hundreds. >> Of. >> Documented NHS trusts who still have unlawful policies with regard have unlawful policies with regard to the provision of single sex hospital accommodation and the NHS policy. Annexe B continues to authorise the placement of biological biological men on women's hospital wards. Will the government act now and instruct these organisations to follow the law and if they continue not to? Can you explain to us when you will act?

11:33

Lord Collins of Highbury, Lords Spokesperson (Equalities) (Labour)

- -

Yeah. >> Well, can I repeat what I said to the noble Lord? I mean, there are many policies in existence that are many policies in existence that will obviously need to undergo review as a consequence of the Supreme Court judgement. That review obviously has to have implications, not just for sex, but also about all the other protective characteristics. Many of these policies cover a whole range of issues, but the fundamental point which I have said to the noble Lord is that the government and all government departments will comply with the law.

That is the answer that she has.

11:33

Oral questions: Consultation with the fire and rescue services in England regarding clean energy projects such as battery storage plants

Third Oral Question Baroness. >> The third Oral Question, Baroness McIntosh or Pickering. >> Ask the question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

11:34

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Government works closely with the National Fire Chiefs Council on Battery Fire Safety, and in October 2025, Minister Shanks held a roundtable with industry regulators and academics on battery safety, including NFC representatives. To date, in the last five years, in fact, there have been four grid scale battery fires in Great Britain. Analysis from the Department for Energy Security and net Zero suggests that these fires appear less likely than fires in non-domestic buildings.

11:34

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, I'm grateful to the noble Lord for that answer, but it is unacceptable that, given the fire risk posed by something as highly combustible, flammable and at risk of thermal runaway as these battery energy storage facilities, that fire and rescue services should not be statutory consultees to the planning application. If you look at one constituency alone, such as the former Vale of York constituency, which I represented, there are best plants to be built in Scotland and Lingfield, Bedale and South Kilvington.

It is putting an enormous stress on the fire and rescue services of North Yorkshire, which last year held had to deal with one of the most aggravating and long term wildfires that we've seen to date. Will the noble Lord use his good offices to ensure that forthwith, in any current planning application, fire and rescue services will be statutory consultees so that they can advise on the fire risk of each individual site, with a view to mitigating the fire risk.

11:36

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Yeah. moved to make sure the fire services and developers are closely involved in applications. As far as large batteries are concerned. The planning practice guidance has been updated to ensure that those developers do consult with fire services in the pursuit of their applications. Fire service itself considers that actually to become a statutory Consultee would would prove enormously bureaucratic and additional to their particular work, and are in line with that guidance.

11:36

Lord John of Southwark (Labour)

- -

Update My Lords, my Lords. chair of the National Building Safety Regulator and as the former London Fire Commissioner. Can I thank my noble friend, the Minister, for his answer? And actually, if I was in my former role, the comprehensive new guidance the government has published with the National Fire Chiefs Council in December 2025 to directly address this issue of battery energy storage system, consultation with fire services. And I would

11:37

Lord Roe of West Wickham (Labour)

- -

certainly agree that if I was in my role, we would have preferred that rather than the bureaucracy of rather than the bureaucracy of being a statutory consultee. However, can I please ask on a related matter, what action the related matter, what action the government is taking following the very serious substation fire at Heathrow Airport, which my colleagues at the time fought for colleagues at the time fought for many days under very dangerous circumstances and which of course circumstances and which of course closed the airport.

Could my noble friend, the Minister, provide an update on how his department intends to implement the 12 recommendations arising from the subsequent National Energy Security Operator investigation?

11:37

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Yeah.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Well, my noble friend, who I pay tribute to for his enormous service in the fire service over a number in the fire service over a number of years, really ought to be the person who knows what he's talking person who knows what he's talking about on the subject. He refers to the the fire in North Hyde a little the the fire in North Hyde a little while ago, which, as I think noble Lords will know, caused considerable problems at Heathrow considerable problems at Heathrow Airport in 2025 that was subject to a neso investigation of the circumstances around that particular fire, which related to faulty maintenance in a in a particular substation.

And as a result of that, that investigation from Neso, the government has accepted all the recommendations that were put forward from the report and is working closely with other government departments and the energy industry in implementing those recommendations and 20 related actions detailed in the government's response to that investigation, and, among other things, that ensures a joined up approach across organisations to improve energy resilience, emergency response and recovery. And the majority of actions are currently forecast to be delivered by the end of 2026.

11:39

Earl Russell (Liberal Democrat)

- -

My Lords. extremely important part of our energy transition, providing much needed stability to our future energy systems. Falling prices and evolving technology are also helping. I welcome the Minister's response and we recognise that robust safety systems are in place. However, Ministers have previously spoken of considering additional measures to enhance the regulation and environment regulation of the environmental and safety risks of b e s. Can I also ask the Minister, does he feel that more work is needed to reassure the public on public safety concerns? Yes.

11:39

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Well, indeed, the government is actively exploring additional measures to manage safety risks on the grid scale Bess sites. And that, of course, is very important in the context, as the noble Lord mentions, of the very substantial expansion that is going to be in, in, in batteries as an essential part of the UK's balancing energy system for the future. So in August, the DEFRA published a consultation on modernising the environmental permitting regime for industry, and that included proposals to include BS within scope of environmental permitting regulations.

And the government is currently reviewing industry feedback and will be publishing a response in due course. And that would require battery developers to demonstrate to the Environment Agency how specific risks are being managed, while also providing for ongoing regulatory inspections of battery sites.

11:40

Lord Mackinlay of Richborough (Conservative)

- -

May I declare my direction for the Global Warming Policy Foundation? When I was the MP for South Thanet, we had the proposal for one of these battery farms, let's call them, and in the constituency, and I wrote to Kent Fire and Rescue with my concerns and they wrote back with theirs. But as Baroness McIntosh quite rightly states, they really have very little part of the process. Now, would I or could I insist or ask the government to consider a statutory section 106 requirement applying to each and every one of these battery farms, so that they have to pay for the specialist equipment that the local fire and rescue needs to put such fires out.

Because once they start to go, there is very little you can do with with usual water systems to put them out. It requires specialist equipment and not least a local evacuation, because the fumes that come off these lithium powered fires are very, very serious and deleterious to health.

11:41

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Well, I think we should get this into some proportion. As I've said, the the number of battery fires that there have been over the last five years come to four. And indeed, the number of the percentage of fires which you might encounter if you're in a, in a, in an industrial premises or a commercial premises, are higher than that proportion per thousand of battery fires. So battery fires stand within the general problem of fires across industry.

As far as the extinction of those fires are concerned. Then there is protocol already in the fire service about how they deal with those particular fires, and that is a process of enabling burnout so that the the particular battery doesn't self reignite the, the the noble Lord is is is correct to say that there are particular issues relating to battery fires, particularly in terms of the ability of that battery to fire, to reignite itself even in the absence of oxygen.

So they have a protocol now to surround the fire with safety measures and allow that to burn out, and that as far as the fire service chiefs are concerned, is a perfectly adequate and safe response to those fires.

11:43

Lord Moynihan (Conservative)

- -

Can I ask. figures on battery fires? On the 6th of September, 2024, the noble Lord Lord Redesdale led an outstanding debate in your Lordships House on lithium ion battery safety and superb contributions were made across the House, particularly by the noble Lord Lord Winston. Since then, battery fires in bin loads and at waste sites in the UK have reached an all time high. Not My Lords four, but more than 1200 in 2024, an increase of 71% from 700 in 2022, which was described by the Environmental Services Association as, and I quote, an epidemic.

So would the Minister not take this opportunity to go back to his department and agree that, at a minimum, we need the fire service, the environmental agency and the Health and Safety Executive to be statutory consultees of all planning a new standalone battery energy storage systems. There is urgent action required in this sector. sector.

11:44

Lord Whitehead, Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero) (Labour)

- -

Well, I don't intend to go back to the department and tell them that they are there. Particular concerns are wrong because what we are talking about today is large standalone battery storage plants in which there have been four. And I can if the if the noble Lord would like to get the individual addresses and locations of those four fires. I have this here have been four in the last five years in large standalone batteries. It is not the case that that that therefore covers every other single battery fire there ever has been.

And we know that certain batteries, for example, illegally imported batteries on scooters tend to be a little less safe than other batteries concerned. So there is proper concern about some areas of battery safety and maintenance, but not as far as this particular sector concerned. And indeed that sector is very well regulated, very safe now. And indeed, as I have set out today, there have been further measures to ensure that the safety and integrity of those standalone batteries is maintained.

Blencathra.

11:45

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the question. Standing in my name on the Order Paper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, the National Planning Policy Framework. Is clear that inappropriate development in. Flood risk areas.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Flood risk areas. Should be avoided by directing development away from areas. At highest risk. If necessary. In such.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In such. Areas, development should be made safe for its lifetime without increasing flood risk elsewhere. increasing flood risk elsewhere. The framework also requires any development which could have drainage impacts to incorporate drainage impacts to incorporate sustainable drainage systems. We are consulting on a clearer, more rules based framework, including a dedicated chapter on flood risk.

11:46

Lord Blencathra (Conservative)

- -

I'm grateful to the noble Lady, the Minister, for that reply. The the Minister, for that reply. The framework may suggest that, but my Lords, reliable figures from the insurer Aviva reveal a trend of more and more new homes being built in medium and high flood risk areas, up from 8% ten years ago to 11% last year, and potentially rising to 15% of new homes by 2050. In addition, of course, the flood insurance scheme does not apply to houses built after 2009 and is due to end in 2039.

So will the government publish its own figures on this worrying trend, and what will the government do to ensure progress towards reducing housing construction in flood risk areas?

11:46

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

Well, I'm I'm pleased to tell the noble Lord that 96% of all planning decisions and 99% of all new homes proposed in planning applications, comply with environmental agency advice. So we are making progress with this. I accept his point that it's very important that we continue as we work towards our target of 1.5 million homes in this country, desperately needed because of the housing crisis, that we do continue to push forward with the National Planning Framework guidelines that homes should not be built in flood risk areas.

The sequential test still applies to the build of new build homes and the planning applications for them, as does securing high quality, sustainable drainage systems to support flood risk management. It's impossible to to push forward with this without sometimes using areas that might be at risk of flooding. The important thing is that the mitigation is put happens.

11:47

The Earl of Devon (Crossbench)

- -

My Lords. the government taking to allow flooding and housing to coexist? Is His Majesty's Government considering the urban planning model of sponge cities using nature based solutions such as permeable pavements, planted roofs and urban wetlands to absorb, store, purify and reuse rainwater to mitigate both flooding and drought. both flooding and drought.

11:48

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

That's a very interesting concept, which I had heard about. We do need to make sure that all steps that can be taken to mitigate flood risk are taken, even in areas that aren't subject to flood risk. The increase of surface flood water is an issue, and we we need to make sure that where possible, permeable surfaces are laid down. And I think it's very helpful that both the the the building guidelines and the National Planning Policy Framework are directing as much attention as possible to make sure that when applications come forward, they are mitigating the flood risk and that buildings are built with that mitigation built in as well.

11:49

Baroness Bakewell of Hardington Mandeville (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Thank the lady for what she said. And the government white paper.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

A new Vision for water on page 40 gives a case study of how a 40 gives a case study of how a housing development was stalled on a habitat site with protected species. The government's water delivery Task force was able to unblock this, resulting in 4000 unblock this, resulting in 4000 houses being built. My Lords unblocking challenges could result unblocking challenges could result in additional flooding, endangered protected species and ultimately result in new homeowners. Homeowners being refused access to Flood Re, which has only 15 years left to run.

How will the Minister ensure this does not happen?

11:49

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

Well, I don't accept the premise of the noble Ladies question that we can't protect the biodiversity arrangements at the same time as we're dealing with flood risk. DEFRA has established the Water Delivery Task Force to make sure water companies delivered on their planned investments to provide water and waste water capacity. Government has worked hard to secure £104 billion of private sector investment into this and partnership with water companies, investors and communities. We will be introducing a new water reform bill to modernise the whole system and that will make it fit for decades, leading to clean rivers, stronger regulations and greater investment.

So we're focusing on both the provision of good water supplies as we build the the homes that we need, but also protecting biodiversity. These things go hand exclusive.

11:50

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (Green Party)

- -

I'm not. The water reform bill. I want to get on to that too much. It's a terrible bill and the government ought to withdraw it. But on this issue of flood risk, the fact is houses are still being built on places that risk flood, flooding. And some of the solutions are much wider than just putting a few ditches around the housing project. You have to think very big when you're looking at floods, because you have to look uphill and downhill.

And at the moment I feel that some of the measures are very limited in scope. Does the government.

11:51

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

Well, I wouldn't agree with the noble Lady. I think some there's been some amazing work done by the development industry in tackling the risk of flooding and the mitigations for it. I've been to visit sites myself with very attractive looking, sustainable drainage systems that do. Not only do they deal with the issue of surface water and flood water, they also provide fantastic environmental features for those estates. And I think that, you know, that encourages people to get involved with and to speak to the previous questioner's point.

It encourages biodiversity as well as tackling the flooding issues. So developers are doing that. I think what we need to do is make sure that the those who are providing the best practice in this area, that we share that and make sure everybody is working to enhance that best practice.

11:52

The Earl of Kinnoull (Crossbench)

- -

My Lords, would the.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Noble Lady, the Minister, agree. That actually the time is right. For a review of the flood?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Reprogramme as we heard from. Lord Blencathra, it doesn't apply to buildings which were built apply to buildings which were built after the 1st of January 2009. It doesn't apply to blocks of flats that have more than. I think it's that have more than. I think it's three dwelling units within them. It doesn't apply to buildings that have any element of small have any element of small commercial, micro commercial businesses within them. And these are all things that would be very helpful to have the availability of the flood insurance, which is a very good programme.

And I wondered if it is time now for this to be looked at very hard.

11:52

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

Well, we know that Flood Wray has provided cover for 346,000 household policies, and 650,000 properties have benefited since the scheme's launched. So I agree with the noble Lord that it's been a very valuable scheme, and we know now that all homes built since 2009 are excluded from flood Re, as that would be inconsistent with current policy. So what we what we're trying to do with the planning policy is make it clear that inappropriate development in floodplain should be avoided and where development is necessary in a flood risk area, it should be made flood resistant, resilient and safe for the lifetime of the development.

But build build back better is the UK Home Insurance Sector initiative, which I'm sure the noble Lord is aware of. Designed to help homeowners recover from flooding in a smarter way, and that enables eligible policyholders to access 10,000 to install flood measures during repairs over and above the usual costs. So we're looking at supporting those who have been at risk of flooding, but also through the planning policy framework, making sure we absolutely reduce that risk to a minimum.

11:54

Lord Jamieson (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, flood risk management. between developers, local authorities, insurers and homeowners. So what steps is government taking to ensure that institutional knowledge and specialist risk management expertise is not lost during local government reorganisation?

11:54

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

I'm sure my colleagues in local government who address these issues every day through the planning system, as the noble Lord will be well aware, are more than alert to the issue of making sure that the new authorities, when they're set up and they will have more resilience in their planning functions because there will be fewer of them, and they will be able to focus on the planning issues with the capacity as well, using the capacity funding that the government has put into planning.

But as importantly, there will be the strategic level of planning which will be able to plan across the combined authority area, which will make sure that right from the strategic level to the Local Plan, that issues of flood risk are taken into account. And as we develop our new national planning policy framework, we're making sure that that will support local authorities in doing just that.

11:55

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative)

- -

Noble Lady will be aware when she referred to the sequential test that that was overturned in the High Court case recently of Gladstone, will her department respond to that case and ensure the sequential test is met in every case?

11:55

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour)

- -

I know that during recent debates we've had on the English devolution Bill, that High Court judgement has been raised. Obviously, I can't comment on specific cases, but the case doesn't disapply the strong protections in the national planning policy framework relating to development in areas of potential flood risk. The sequential test is a procedural step to assess relative degrees of risks, and is used to steer development to areas of lower risk where possible, but where development is necessary.

In such areas, the framework is very clear it should only proceed if made safe for its lifetime without increasing flood risk elsewhere, because that's the other danger of it. So I can reassure the noble Lady. The sequential test remains firmly in place as part of the planning process.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, that completes oral

**** Possible New Speaker ****

questions for today. My Lords, before I call the next business, if any noble Lord wishes to leave the chamber, this may be a

11:57

Statement: Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territories

Questions Questions on Questions on an Questions on an answer Questions on an answer to Questions on an answer to an Questions on an answer to an urgent question asked in the House of question asked in the House of Commons yesterday on Diego Garcia Commons yesterday on Diego Garcia military base. I'll start again. My Lords. Questions on an answer to an urgent question asked in the House urgent question asked in the House of Commons yesterday on Diego Garcia military base and British

11:57

Lord Callanan (Conservative)

- -

Garcia military base and British Indian Ocean territories.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, can I firstly warmly welcome the statement. From the Minister in the other place that this dreadful surrender bill is this dreadful surrender bill is being paused pending further discussions with the United States. discussions with the United States. My amendment of a few weeks ago that the noble Lady at the time described as wrecking, of course, described as wrecking, of course, called for exactly that. So it's great that the government now seem to be in the same place. Does the to be in the same place.

Does the noble Lady agree that had the government followed the logical sequence of agreeing their new treaty, and then amendments to the 1966 treaty with the US before progressing with this bill, then they would not be in this embarrassing position today. On the subject of pauses, can I ask the noble Lady to pause the no fault eviction of the group of Chagossians who have returned to take up residence on one of the outer Chagos Islands? Throughout the passage of the bill? The noble Lady on many occasions rightly expressed her sadness and her shame at the way a previous Labour government had evicted the Chagossians from their homes.

We will now, of course, see just how sincere she was in those comments by whether this current Labour government carries out another forceful eviction of British citizens from a British territory. And finally, does the noble Lady agree that the current international crisis and the possible use of Diego Garcia for military strikes against Iran demonstrates the absolutely vital strategic importance of the base and why we should retain it under control.

11:59

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

My Lords. way to some of the outer islands should not be there. It is not safe for them to be there. They do not have permission to be there. It is not legal for anybody to visit those islands without a permit. They do not have such a permit and they should leave immediately. It is deeply irresponsible that they are encouraging others to join them, and there is a risk to life in doing so. I hope that they leave of their own accord safely but promptly.

And the noble Lord is right that this base is of vital strategic importance. It is an expression of our incredibly close security and defence relationship with the United States, which is why we have gone to such lengths to secure the future of the base.

12:00

Lord Purvis of Tweed (Liberal Democrat)

- -

En bloc note the fact that conservative MPs Nigel Farage and Tommy Robinson, all who proclaim to love their country, actively undermine it when they are in the State Department and the white House. It is, however, necessary now, given the statement of President Trump, for us to be presented with what would be a binding decision of the United States with our key ally with regard to the use of the military base. But if there is a pause, then will the Minister agree that this is an opportunity to put a statutory right for the Chagossian community with regards to resettlement, for there to be active participation of the Chagossian community on decisions that affect them, and for there to be greater clarity on the value for money of our taxpayers.

If there is to be a treaty, long, long term treaty, and for there to be greater role of this Parliament in holding any government to account over the lifetime of that treaty.

12:01

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

I think it's very important that we lay out clearly the costings and the value for money points are answered, and I'm happy that the government has committed to doing that and will continue to. On the participation of Chagossians. I mean, we have discussed this at great length in the past and for very good reason, and I think we are able to find ways together with Mauritius to make sure that Chagossians are properly represented and are able to exert the the influence that they, within the treaty, around the trust fund, around their ability to resettle in the future.

And who's entitled to do that and all of these issues. And I think it's it's probably a good idea for us to continue those conversations, to make sure that that is done as well as it possibly can. On the stability of the US position. I take the point. We had secured very clear and firm support for the deal from Secretary Rubio, from President Trump. We continue to have close, intense conversations with our dearest allies and partners about the consistency of this decision, in order that we may be able to move forward with this treaty, which, as I've said, secures the our ability to operate together with the United States from Diego Garcia.

12:02

Lord Bellingham (Conservative)

- -

Very point that the Minister said on 12 occasions, and I've got a list of them that the treaty can only go ahead with US support. Well, the US president said last week that this is a blight on our great ally and that the UK should not give up Diego Garcia. The following day, the president's senior press officer, Caroline Leavitt, was asked whether. Asked by the BBC whether the president's statement was now official policy, and she said it certainly was official policy.

So can the Minister tell us what is her plan B? Yeah.

12:03

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

Well, our plan is to proceed as I've said, which is to speak with I've said, which is to speak with our friend, allies partner, close, close, close friend in Washington to establish a stable position here. Because it is true. And I have said repeatedly, and it's good to know he's been listening and counting so assiduously that this is all about securing the base for the United Kingdom and the United States to operate together.

12:03

Lord Carlile of Berriew (Crossbench)

- -

With the noble Lady, the Minister agree that the imperative about what happens to the base is the national security of this our country, not only for those of us sitting here in our generation, but in the generations to come in the next hundred years or so. And would she agree that Noises Off can be distracting and misleading, and that at the end of the day, we have to make up our own minds?

12:04

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

Well, we do need to make our own minds and we have done so. But I don't think it's realistic to proceed in a way that doesn't involve the support of our allies in the United States who pay for and pay for the base and the operating of the base, and that we work with so closely. But he is right about Noises Off. And sometimes you do have to wonder about the motivation of some of those conducting themselves in that way.

12:04

Baroness Goldie (Conservative)

- -

Why does the think that the international courts. just said, and I quote, about our dearest friends and allies with the single most sensible gesture not now be to our dearest friends and ally to put this pause onto permanent hold.

12:04

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

Yes. disclose in this forum the very detailed nature of the conversations that we're having with the United States. But I think it's not for any of us here to tell each other what the best thing to do for the United States would be. It is up to them to talk to us privately at this stage about how it how it is that we should be proceeding to secure the base.

12:05

Lord Redwood (Conservative)

- -

Why does the government think that the international courts can that the international courts can make us give Diego Garcia away to Mauritius, when there are very clear defence opt outs from their jurisdictions in the relevant treaties?

12:05

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

Well, I mean, it's good to see >> Well, I mean, it's good to see the noble Lord here in this place. He hasn't been part of the discussions we've had up to now. If he had been, I think he might have found some useful exchanges across this chamber on that very topic. I am genuinely fascinated about. We think there is a legal basis for the decisions we've made, and although the Lords opposite may disagree with that, there is at least consistency in our position.

I'm genuinely fascinated about what the previous government thought it was doing, negotiating around a dozen times. If it has, it maintains now. It thought that there was no legal jeopardy around the future of the base.

12:06

Baroness Foster of Aghadrumsee (Non-affiliated)

- -

No. >> No. >> No, no, we're here from Baroness Foster next. >> I did say the last time we debated this issue, as the noble debated this issue, as the noble Lady probably remembers that there were consequences to ignoring the voices and indeed, the rights of self-determination of the Chagossian people. We now find ourselves in a situation where they have taken matters into their own hands and have gone to the archipelago. Surely it is now long past the time when we need to kill this treaty.

12:06

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

I do respect the noble Lady, steadfast support for the Chagossian community. But as she will know, there isn't one single view among Chagossian community or Chagossian groups, and there are several which support this new agreement. It is not good that people have found their way to this remote island, which is not suitable for habitation. They are putting their own lives at risk and I think, more importantly, encouraging others to put their lives at risk too. And they should leave promptly.

12:07

Lord Craig of Radley (Crossbench)

- -

May I just correct the Minister. Lord John the 5th of January when debating the Diego Garcia bill, I asked the noble Lady, the Minister, this question is there any legally binding agreement between the UK and the United States that that is, the United States will continue its use of the base or have need of its use for the 99 years duration of the treaty? The noble Lady didn't answer then perhaps she could answer now, because it seems the UK should be aware and assured that the United States is committed for the whole length of the treaty, the 100 years.

12:08

Baroness Chapman of Darlington, Minister of State (Development) (Labour)

- -

It is. It is very important that we have an agreement with the United States about the continued use of this base, because it matters so much to our security. The United States feel the same about it. There is no difference between the United Kingdom and the United States about the need to continue to have that base and to operate it together. We are in complete agreement on that. Where we are having to talk to them now is about the nature of that agreement and about these issues around sovereignty.

We will do that, and we will get these issues resolved so that we can move forward.

12:08

Statement: Impact of the UK’s Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) rules on British citizens who are also dual nationals

The time is up, my Lords, and I must call the next business questions on an answer to an urgent question asked in the House of Commons yesterday on the impact of the UK's electronic travel authorisation rules.

12:09

Lord Davies of Gower (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, any suggestion that there have been insufficient transitional arrangements for the ETA system is surely for the sky. The scheme was introduced three years ago, but was not made mandatory in order to allow for people to adjust. It is absolutely right that the government is now making this system mandatory, and I would also suggest that it is absolutely right that dual nationals should have to enter using British passports. So I'm with the noble Lord, the Minister, on this.

My question for him now is now that we have this system in place, how will the government utilise the information for stronger immigration enforcement?

12:09

Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)

- -

Well, I'm grateful to the noble >> Well, I'm grateful to the noble Lord for his support because, as he knows, this was a position that was introduced by the previous introduced by the previous government and we have seen this through, and I'm very pleased that we've been able to do that. He's asked about how we will use this information for important border control. The whole purpose of the system is to have border control. And I just say to him, he probably knows that today we've had some new figures on immigration positions, and it shows that asylum hotels are at the lowest level for 18 months, which actually coincides with the UK Labour government.

Asylum backlog has fallen for the fourth quarter in a row to 64,426. A small boat arrivals are 9% lower than the peak in 2022. So I would say to him, this is part of a strategy of the government to control our borders, to ensure that we have firm borders, and I welcome his support not just for this measure, but also for the wider government agenda.

12:10

Baroness Ludford (Liberal Democrat)

- -

My Lords.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm not sorry. I'm pleased to disrupt this cosy consensus because, quite honestly, the government's temporary mitigation measure is no good at all. It's leaving to good at all. It's leaving to carrier's discretion. On what carrier's discretion. On what evidence to accept for entry, which is resulting, as my friend in the other place who put this question other place who put this question yesterday said it's chaos for law abiding British citizens and separation of families. Why can this government not do what Canada did? Delaying enforcement and creating a low cost temporary authorisation? Why doesn't this government do something similarly common sense? We understand, you know, that control should be properly enforced, but for goodness sake, leave a breathing space for people for whom the impact is very personal here.

12:11

Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)

- -

Well, as the noble Lord Davies of Gower rightly said, this scheme has been in planning now for some three years. It was introduced by the previous government. We have seen it through. There is always going to be a deadline at some point in any scheme, and the deadline for this scheme introduction was the 26th of February, i.e. this week. So therefore we have a position. Now. What we've tried to do is that if there are individuals who are impacted today or this week or in the near future, there is the temporary mitigation which carriers may at their discretion, as the noble Lady has said, accept an expired UK passport alongside a non-visa national third country passport as evidence of British nationality.

Dual nationals may also ask their carrier to contact the Home Office's carrier support, which is available now. Dual nationals overseas may also wish to contact the embassy. There is provision for urgent travel without a British passport in certain circumstances that's set out in Gov.uk. If the particular problems my colleague, the Immigration Minister, is holding some drop in sessions in the Houses of Parliament next week and the week after, and I would say also that at the end of the day, now the scheme is available, people who wish to have the availability to come to the UK, who are dual nationals, can apply for a British passport or be can apply for a certificate which is a lifetime allowance on that dual national approach.

12:13

Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour)

- -

My Lords, could I thank my noble friend, the Minister, for his answers so far? He will recall that I have written to him on several occasions about an anomaly within the Electronic Travel Authorisation that result in an impediment being placed in the way of the development of tourism in Northern Ireland. The majority of people who come from the United States to Ireland come through Dublin Airport and thus travel to Northern Ireland, adding to our local economy and to the revenue.

But because of the issue of ETAs, it does present that impediment and inconvenience. Could I therefore ask him if he and his ministerial colleagues in the Home Office would look at this issue again to see if an exemption is possible?

12:14

Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)

- -

Well, I'm grateful, and I can reassure my noble friend that the government wishes to ensure that Northern Ireland benefits from inward tourist economy issues. And we have, in discussing the proposals to date, worked with a range of partners, which includes the Northern Ireland Tourism Association, to assure that the ETA requirement is communicated effectively and I don't think ultimately will prove a barrier to people wishing to come to Northern Ireland or indeed the rest of the United Kingdom, to support the tourism objectives we have looked at, and we will look at with the Northern Ireland Statistics Research Agency the impact of this issue.

But I'm afraid I have to say to my noble friend that I can't offer an exemption for visitors to Northern Ireland because that would undermine the rationale of the scheme as a whole, which is to strengthen our borders. As I mentioned to the noble Lord Lord Davies of Gower.

12:15

Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (Green Party)

- -

My Lords.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The rules say that the personal details on the two passports much details on the two passports much match. But Britons in Greece are among the organisations highlighting the fact that this is extraordinarily discriminatory against women, given the fact that, for example, in Greece, and this for example, in Greece, and this also applies to a number of other countries, there are rules about the name they have to have on the Greek passport. If they're married Greek passport. If they're married to a Greek, they have to have their maiden surname as well.

Now the noble Lord, the Minister, may say under extraordinary circumstances, exceptional circumstances. The government said the two names don't have to match, but it can the noble Lord confirm that that does apply in this case, where people literally have no choice but to have two different names on their passport? But more than that, can he guarantee that every single agent for every single airline and other travel company will understand that when people turn up to travel.

12:16

Lord Hanson of Flint, The Minister of State, Home Department (Labour)

- -

And I will look at the specific instance that the noble Lady has mentioned with regard to to Greece, because that hasn't been drawn to my attention to date. And I will look at that and we'll contact her directly. We have made a strong effort since the last government introduced the principle of this, to inform and work with carriers, to ensure that they understand the situation, and without repeating what I said earlier to the noble Baroness Ludford, there are a number of mechanisms whereby now, if she reads Hansard tomorrow, those individuals who feel they have a problem now in this temporary period of transition, can follow that up with a range of

Feed Live - Click to view video

Return to start of debate - Return to top of page