Live Debate: Lords Chamber

Lords Chamber

Monday 23rd March 2026

(began 1 hour, 38 minutes ago)

Share Debate

Watch Live
Skip to latest contribution

14:36

None

Do Do you Do you want Do you want it? Do you want it? Yes.

14:36

peer taking oath

Do you want it? Yes. I Do you want it? Yes. I PFF Do you want it? Yes. I PFF Lord Bowness do swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors according to law. So help me God.

14:36

Lord Teverson (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Perfect. And if you can simply

14:36

peer taking oath

**** Possible New Speaker ****

First First Oral First Oral Question First Oral Question Lord Teverson.

14:37

Oral questions: Repowering onshore wind farms

14:37

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

- -

My Lord True. I beg leave to ask the question standing my name on the Order Paper. the Order Paper. >> Government recognises the importance of repowering to maximise the benefits from our maximise the benefits from our existing fleet of turbines. We're working to remove barriers in the planning system to accelerate repowering and undertaking updates to planning policy in England. In addition, government announced changes to enable repowered onshore wind projects that meet eligibility criteria to bid into the contracts for Difference scheme from allocation round seven onwards.

14:37

Lord Teverson (Liberal Democrat)

- -

I welcome the Minister's positive reply. There are some 200 windfarm sites coming up for operational termination by 2030, some three megawatts of power. And if we manage to repower these, then we could have an additional two gigawatts without having new sites. This is clearly makes sense. Clearly makes sense. Will the government then strengthen the planning guidance for repowering, as he has indicated? Because that gets in the way. And will he integrate repowering into the strategic energy spatial plan? It's obvious.

Let's come on. Let's do it. Yeah.

14:38

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

- -

Well, the government is already undertaking changes to planning undertaking changes to planning arrangements to make sure that schemes can proceed faster and more immediately. And in the case of repowering, that's obviously the difference between having to treat a scheme as perhaps a brand new development and one which actually can proceed very quickly with the necessary consents in place.

14:39

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative)

- -

Consider very carefully the cumulative impact of these cumulative impact of these repowering of overhead power lines in conjunction with the onshore wind farms. Does he not see this as creeping urbanisation of the countryside? And it's something should be avoided at all costs, or at the very least, use the electricity that is generated in this way locally so it's not transmitted the length of the country through overhead power lines.

14:39

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

- -

Yeah. >> Well, I, I had thought I was talking this afternoon about the repowering of wind turbines. That is the taking of turbines which have undertaken their life in terms of their original blades, their original mountings. They are out of renewable obligation certificate, period. And the question for those sites is to whether they repower or go merchant or close down. That's what the question was about. But obviously the question of repowering, as far as cables are concerned, is rather more a question of actually making sure that the cables that we have across the country are able to carry the new loads, that that will be within their capability, we hope, for the future.

And that is really a question of making sure that that is done in the most environmentally friendly way possible, but at the same time, having the considerable speed that we can get into by changing in the planning regulations as, as fast as possible.

14:41

Lord Lennie (Labour)

- -

The planning, planning presumption, the planning presumption under the Tories 14 years in power was that if a single years in power was that if a single objector objected to to an onshore power plant, then it was rejected automatically. Can the noble Lord say whether the planning presumption would change in favour of the onshore power plants rather than against them?

14:41

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

- -

Well, indeed, the first thing literally that the Department of Energy and Net Zero did upon the Labour government taking office was to remove the ban on onshore wind and make sure that onshore wind could. In future, as we have begun to see in the allocation rounds, play a full part in the development of UK wind and it is really a crying shame that onshore was effectively banned for such a long time, and is only now recovering.

14:41

Lord Foulkes about the >> Lord Foulkes about the environmental benefits. Although environmental necessity of

**** Possible New Speaker ****

transforming. Thank you very much. Thank you my Lord. I wonder if the Minister my Lord. I wonder if the Minister is aware of the deep anger and enduring resentment felt about the way in which the heritage coast of Suffolk, an area of outstanding natural Beauty, is being laid waste by the enormous mass of bringing both rebuilding Sizewell and

14:42

Lord Morse (Crossbench)

- -

bringing onshore a series of ill reconciled offshore offshore

14:42

reconciled offshore offshore programmes coming onshore. This annoyance is being further added to

14:42

Lord Morse (Crossbench)

- -

annoyance is being further added to by the by the dismissal of of many of the points being made in of the points being made in consultation as being NIMBYism. Are we going to have a similar performance with onshore power

**** Possible New Speaker ****

performance with onshore power industry, I wonder? Well, I'm sure we won't, because onshore power, just as offshore power and all other forms of

14:42

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

- -

renewable power has to abide by planning guidelines, has to abide by guidance, and has to fit in well by guidance, and has to fit in well with all the environmental considerations that are being put forward. So there will be no change forward. So there will be no change in that particular requirement. It's just the question that maybe It's just the question that maybe with speeding up some of those processes, offshore wind, where it processes, offshore wind, where it is onshore wind where it is requested and where it fits all those requirements can proceed very quickly.

14:43

Lord Swire (Conservative)

- -

Why is the government so steadfast in its refusal to have a steadfast in its refusal to have a proper and open debate about the relative benefits, environmental and otherwise, of burying power and otherwise, of burying power lines, as opposed to overhead power lines? This is not an argument that's going to go away. It's about time the government fessed up on this and didn't rely on hugely inflated figures provided by the National Grid.

14:43

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

- -

Yeah, of course. >> I'm I'm slightly puzzled by the noble Lords enunciation of that question. Inasmuch as renewable wind and overhead power lines go closely together, because the overhead power lines have to deliver the power that is being put forward from the renewable power sources. But certainly as far as the requirement for those those variable power lines, those that variable output to be matched by various other sources of energy, when, for example, the wind isn't blowing on, the sun isn't shining.

That is well taken care of in terms of the backup that there is already in the system, I might add, by a number of renewable sources. Also being non-variable.

14:44

Baroness Hayman (Crossbench)

- -

I declare my interest as a director of fears for the planet, given what the noble Lord Tennyson said in asking this question. The increased productivity of onshore wind when it is replacement for infrastructure that's already there, isn't it time that the government did as he said? Get on with it. And I would remind him that the urgency of coming to conclusions on repowering existing onshore wind was included in the private member's bill that I introduced and your Lordships' House some five years ago.

14:45

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

- -

I pay tribute to the noble Baroness for all her work in this field, and indeed for that particular bill that was introduced. As far as getting on with it is concerned, there is nobody who wants to get on with it less or more than I, than I do rather, and what the the noble, the noble Lord, Lord Teverson, has drawn attention to is that actually we have probably 10.7GW or more of onshore wind capacity that could retire between 2027 and 2042.

Those are onshore farms that will be completely lost if they retire without any repowering. So repowering is clearly absolutely essential, not only in order to keep those wind farms going on the same sites as they were previously, but also because of the tremendous power gain that could come about by using modern turbine methods and modern blades to to increase the output by perhaps up to two thirds of existing sites when they are repowered.

14:46

Lord Moynihan (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, my. >> Lords. >> When considering repowering, our. Intermittent wind energy. When, to Intermittent wind energy. When, to use the words of the Minister, the sun doesn't shine or the wind doesn't blow, does the noble Lord, the Minister, agree with me that the main energy policy lesson from the current crisis is that as a nation, we should prioritise our own energy independence of firm power, and so does the noble Lords Minister agree that the best way to achieve this is to reduce our LNG imports from the Gulf and the US by accelerating gas development in the North Sea, and for his Department to provide the one piece of paper.

We are all waiting on the approval of the jackdaw gas field to heat autumn.

14:47

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

- -

Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I think we've been around this path several times before. Recently, suddenly introducing lots more gas into the system would make no difference to the resilience of this country in terms of international prices, whereas actually developing genuinely home-grown power over a period of time makes all the difference. And that home-grown power I would add to the noble Lord. It's not just variable home-grown renewable power, but can be such as batteries such as biomass and so on, can be firm power in their own right.

So it's a question of getting the whole picture together to make sure that the variable power and the firm power and renewable basis complement each other so that you have reliable power and it is home-grown and it is secure in the long term.

14:48

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

- -

Second, Oral Question Baroness Goudie. >> I'd like to ask leave the House to ask the question of my name. We remain committed to the principle remain committed to the principle that Russia should pay for the damage that it has caused. We will continue to coordinate with international partners to ensure that Ukraine gets the funding it needs. In December 2025, the United Kingdom signed the convention to establish an International Claims Commission for Ukraine. The commission will assess claims submitted under the Register of Damage to determine future compensation amounts to be repaid by Russia.

14:48

Baroness Goudie (Labour)

- -

Thank you. >> The United Kingdom support package for Ukraine must include financial repatriation for financial repatriation for survivors of human rights. Frozen Russian assets must be utilised to support this objective. The government continued to work with the G7 and the European Union. The Ukraine facility provides the financing for Ukraine. It is, upon satisfactory fulfilment of the conditions laid down in Ukraine. Plan 2427. This sets out both the investment and the reform agenda for Ukraine, including the measures to strengthen the rule of law.

Assistance must be linked to policy conditions, including to assist the financing of compensation as a form of repatriation to individuals who have suffered damage from illegal actions of Russia.

14:49

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

- -

Well, I think I agree with my noble friend and that is why the Register and the Commission are vital parts of the role that the UK is playing to support Ukraine.

14:49

Baroness Bull (Crossbench)

- -

I thank the noble Lady, my Lords, as of late 2024, the Ukraine's Ministry of Culture has reported at least 2000 instances of damage to and looting of cultural sites and infrastructure, museums, libraries, religious sites, historical buildings and so on. Does the noble Lady agree that this wanton destruction of cultural cultural heritage is a war crime, and it is a blatant act intended to destroy cultural identity and the distinct nationhood of Ukraine? So if so, will government commit to ensuring that financial reparation will include restitution, repatriation and reconstruction of these cultural assets, which is so vital to Ukraine's identity, both historic and going forwards?

14:50

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

- -

Yeah. >> I think the noble Lady draws our attention to an important aspect of this hideous war, which is the this hideous war, which is the attack on Ukrainian identity. And one of the ways that this is put into effect is through the deliberate, wanton destruction of cultural artefacts, and they can be registered as part of the register, and decisions will be made. I think there are 130,000 so far registered acts that have been included. Obviously, there are far, far more than that that we can expect to be included.

But all of these things need to be considered because, as I say, this is an attack. This isn't just about territory. This is about Ukrainian identity.

14:51

Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton (Conservative)

- -

Does the does the Minister agree with me that that we shouldn't give with me that that we shouldn't give up on the idea that the frozen Russian assets themselves should be used, rather than just making loans or payments on their behalf. They should be seen as a down payment on the reparations that Russia will one day rightly have to pay. And does she further agree with me that while at the moment clearly we don't see the United States giving as much attention to this conflict as we would like, I'm sure she has seen that the Ukrainians are inflicting record casualties on Russian troops through their brilliant use of drones, and this proves that this is a cause worth investing in, worth supporting because the Ukrainians are in the right.

14:52

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

- -

Yeah, absolutely. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> And the we've ordered Maiadh and said very, very many times in this chamber and elsewhere, our admiration, respect, determination to stand by the people of Ukraine. I think this last point was really quite important. Yes, we must remain focussed on Ukraine despite what is happening elsewhere. But actually the innovation and the learning that the Ukrainian fighters have been able to glean from their heroic efforts is going to be absolutely vital in defending against drone attacks in other parts of the world.

14:52

Lord Purvis of Tweed (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Excellent question. The noble Lord who has just asked, asked the Minister was one that I asked him Minister was one that I asked him two years ago. Regrettably, it's still a question that needs to be asked. However, the government has frozen now upwards of £25 billion of Russian assets. Will the Minister agree with me that it would be inconceivable for the Putin regime to be rewarded for having their assets back after all of the horrors they've inflicted on the Ukrainian people? So should we not seize this fund these funds, and allow Ukraine to fight for its own sovereignty and to repair the damage that's been inflicted on them?

14:53

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

- -

Well, I think that is pretty much impossible to conceive of. And I think, you know, the the, the sanctions regime, which I know the noble Lord will be aware of, and I know. My noble friend is is aware of as well, is that under our current sanctions legislation, we can freeze assets. We cannot seize them. But we do need to make sure that, however this is done, it is Russia that pays the price for its illegal aggression in Ukraine.

14:53

Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour)

- -

My Lords, my Lords, I agree with my noble friend, the Minister, that my noble friend, the Minister, that it will take careful work to construct an appropriate legal structure for redirection of frozen assets in the future. In the meantime, what is happening to the interest?

14:54

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

- -

Yes. point. And I think that any interest must be dealt with fairly, and that the principle about the aggressor pays must be maintained. I think that the consideration of what is done with the interest, I seem to that something is triggering now in my brain and that that is being dealt with differently. And that has been used in order to support loans to Ukraine. So it is being dealt with differently. But the fundamental point and the point that really matters here is that it is Russia that needs to pay for the consequences of what it has chosen to do.

14:54

Yeah. refugee movements in the Middle East?

14:55

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

- -

I mean, we are working very >> I mean, we are working very closely with allies and partners in the in the Middle East. We have announced very recently some additional funding, particularly for Lebanon, which has been a long standing host for displaced people, and the same in Jordan and elsewhere. And we will continue to play the fullest role in supporting those displaced communities.

14:55

Lord Hannay of Chiswick (Crossbench)

- -

I Lord Stockwood that could the >> I Lord Stockwood that could the noble Lady, the Minister, say, whether in the discussion that the Prime Minister had with the Prime Minister had with the president of the United States for the weekend, he drew attention to the talks that President Zelensky had with us in in, in Westminster last week and emphasised the need to keep the pressure on Russia and given President Trump's capacity to change his mind, might it not be worth having another go at that?

14:56

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

- -

Well, the Prime Minister doesn't >> Well, the Prime Minister doesn't need me to remind him to raise the importance of standing shoulder to importance of standing shoulder to shoulder with President Zelensky and the people of Ukraine at every opportunity. I know that he does this, and he will continue to do so.

14:56

Lord Callanan (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, I think there's unanimity across the House here. I find myself agreeing with both Lord Purvis and Lord Cashman on this matter, and the noble Lady in that Russia should fund the reparation of the appalling damages that they have inflicted on the people of Ukraine. To that end, could she tell the House where the government have got to in their pursuit of utilising the assets from the sale of Chelsea Football Club to help in that cause?

14:56

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

- -

We continue in our position that those assets should be used to those assets should be used to support the people of Ukraine. We will continue to use whatever mechanisms we can to bring this about. It does need to be done in lockstep with our partners. And, you know, that is the approach we've taken. We will act within the law because we think that is the right thing to do. But he's absolutely right to raise this. And, you know, there is money there that should be going to the people of Ukraine.

That is what was promised.

14:57

Lord Teverson (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Some, given that Ukraine has gone slightly below the radar because of the Middle East. But would she agree with me that the coverage over the last year was quite negative about Ukraine? But it's actually turned out more recently that actually Ukraine does have the cards and is very successful in its resistance to the Russian invasion.

14:57

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

- -

Well, this. >> Well, this. >> Was an invasion. It was a war that was meant to last three weeks. If that and look at where we are If that and look at where we are now in 2026 and look at what we are learning and being inspired by the people of Ukraine. This does need to end. And this it is, you know, there is that Ukraine is ready for peace. It is said it is ready for a ceasefire and is willing to do that.

It is Russia that is prolonging this dreadful conflict. And we still have close to 20,000 children, Ukrainian children held in Ukraine, in Russia. This is still continuing. It is wrong and it could stop and it should stop now.

14:58

Lord Londesborough (Crossbench)

- -

Yeah. >> Oral Question Lord Londesborough. >> My Lords, I. >> Beg leave to ask a question. >> Standing in my name on the Order Paper and declare my interest as a migraine sufferer.

14:58

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

My Lords, the government is committed to improving migraine care through the 10 Year Health Plan. We are strengthening neurological services by expanding community based care, community diagnostics for earlier identification, widening the availability of effective treatments such as cancer, calcitonin gene related peptide inhibitors, as well as enhancing the NHS app. NHS England's neurology programs are also expanding specialist capacity, reducing avoidable A&E attendances and also helping people with migraine remain in work and maintain their well-being.

14:59

Lord Londesborough (Crossbench)

- -

I thank the Minister for >> I thank the Minister for engaging in a subject that has been raised just once in this House raised just once in this House since 1961, which is extraordinary as we have 10 million migraine sufferers in the UK, more than half of whom have no diagnosis or no access to preventative medication. Migraines cost the wider economy more than £10 billion per annum in lost productivity and tax revenues, with hundreds of thousands of capable people unable to work due to lack of treatment.

So does the Minister agree? There's a compelling economic as well as compassionate argument for better GP training, more neurologists and for including migraine in the NHS pharmacy first scheme.

14:59

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

I do agree with the noble Lord and I appreciate the conversations that we've had prior to this question and acknowledge that he is one of the millions of people suffering from this condition. Certainly, there's a very substantial economic and NHS impact in terms of migraine, but I am glad that the my Department is working with the Department of Work and Pensions on a number of initiatives, including the Workworld program and the individual Placement and Support in Primary Care Initiative.

They are all focussed on supporting those with migraine to stay in work and get back to work.

15:00

Baroness Winterton of Doncaster (Labour)

- -

My Lords, the approach that my noble friend the Minister has outlined with regard to migraine carers is very welcome. The ten year plan also talks about cholesterol management due to its due to its links to cardiovascular disease, but quite often in terms of the care that's provided, it can be quite confusing for the patient. A simple example would be cheese is bad for cholesterol, but good for osteoporosis. And so the heart UK have raised the fact that there should be a holistic approach to the patient in the ten year plan and delivery of it.

Can she make sure that this happens?

15:01

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

I can indeed say to my noble friend, that's exactly at the core friend, that's exactly at the core of the ten year plan and a holistic approach, but also the enhancement of care through expanded community diagnostics, better prevention, and also the use of personalised digital tools, including the NHS app. All of these will be helpful in the way that the noble Lady seeks. And I would also say that the workforce plan, which we will see shortly to support the ten year health plan, will also acknowledge the need to see people in a holistic way and to staff up accordingly.

15:02

Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat)

- -

My Lords, 20% increase. >> In emergency hospital admissions since 2021 due to this condition. Will the government include and Will the government include and fund migraine in the Pharmacy First scheme, empowering pharmacists to prescribe for this high volume condition?

15:02

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

Well, we do constantly review >> Well, we do constantly review and discuss with pharmacists the and discuss with pharmacists the range. That of conditions that they cover. It has been one of the very highly successful ways of getting community based care available, and certainly we want to continue to work with pharmacists. But it is also important to notice that there are more modern treatments available now on prescription. And all of these will also support people to manage their condition and to reduce unnecessary A&E admissions.

My Lords, as has already been.

15:03

Baroness Manzoor (Conservative)

- -

Mentioned, there. >> And it's highly prevalent in women. And of course, it's also linked to anxiety and depression. I welcome what the government is welcome what the government is doing in terms of extending the women health care hubs and the emphasis of mental health in the ten year plan, but unfortunately, there isn't a systematic gateways for migraine care in the ten year plan. And I'm wondering how the government could address this in light of the significant problem that there is.

And I'm sorry to hear that that Lord Goldsmith suffers from migraine.

15:03

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

Well, this is and it's important we acknowledge this is a debilitating condition. And the noble Lady is right that it is one of the most common neurological conditions affecting 1 in 5 women and 1 in 15 men. And indeed, it's a major course of disability. The ten year plan sets out the main pillars, but for example, there is to be an updated adult neurology service specification, which will come into being just next month. It was published in August and I believe it will take account of the points the noble Lady rightly raises.

15:04

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour)

- -

My Lords, my Lords, my noble >> My Lords, my Lords, my noble friend, in her first response, very welcoming me, talked about widening welcoming me, talked about widening access to treatment. My Lords, my understanding is that nice guidelines at the moment can be very tight in relation to some of those treatments. Can I ask her, as part of the work that she's put forward that we could she ask nice to review their guidelines to make sure they're absolutely up to speed?

15:04

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

Well, that's my noble friend I >> Well, that's my noble friend I know is well aware that eligibility criteria is set independently by criteria is set independently by nice. It is based on clinical evidence and cost effectiveness, rather than being set by Ministers. But it is worth saying that the introduction introduction of oral CGI, which do not require specialist initiation, will significantly widen access through primary care and reduce the bottlenecks that are in the system. We are very keen that people are able to access effective drugs, and I certainly take on board the point my noble friend makes.

15:05

Lord Kamall (Conservative)

- -

My Lord, can I thank the noble Lord for the question? Because many people think migraines or migraines are just a bad headache, but they are just a bad headache, but they are in fact a distinct, complex neurological condition and responsible for 43 million lost working days each year and estimated to cost the UK economy up to 4.4 billion. Now, the noble Lady right quite rightly talked about calcitonin gene related peptide. I hope I pronounced that correctly c, g, r p therapies, but apparently only about 29% of trusts allow access to Cgrp's.

Now I welcome what the noble has said about increased access via primary care. But the thing about these drugs that they prevent migraines by targeting a molecule involved in pain transmission. So what specific steps are noble Lady, the minister's department taking to increase access to these treatments? In addition to the primary care initiatives.

15:06

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

We do very much recognise the concerns that people may be facing concerns that people may be facing unnecessary hurdles when trying to access CRP treatments. So I can say to this point that that NHS England is working with integrated care boards to ensure that there is a consistency and timeliness. In part, the pathways that are being followed and perhaps also be helpful if I mention some of the national tools such as Rightcare Headache and Migraine Toolkit and getting it right first time recommendations.

They also speak to the clearer refer referral rates the noble Lord calls for and reduce variation. We want people to receive appropriate treatment. We don't want them delayed.

15:07

Lord Patel (Crossbench)

- -

Prolonged migraine is a symptom that is manifestation of a whole that is manifestation of a whole spectrum of different diseases, both neurological and vascular, and some of course also based to some allergies. So the important aspects in the treatment is the correct diagnosis. And some of the correct diagnosis now has advances in diagnostic techniques that is much more available, including some of the treatments that the noble Baroness the Minister mentioned. So the important aspect is, apart from it, having a community based service is to have the training of the right people to make the right doses, so the patients can get the right treatment at the right time, no matter who dispenses it or prescribes it, which he agreed.

15:08

Baroness Blower (Labour)

- -

And I certainly do agree. And Nice's headache guideline and the Royal College of GP training modules do support that. Better recognition and management. >> My Lords, speaking as a person

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, speaking as a person who was identified as possibly pre-diabetic and having a significant heart and cholesterol problem, I can tell. I can tell the House that when I looked at the charts of what I might be able to eat from both of those sources, it seemed I was left with kale and cucumber. So I think a holistic approach for this is very important, and I'm pleased to say I'm very cucumber.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hey. I'm sure you'll Lordships houses like me. Delighted to hear that

15:08

Baroness Merron, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Health and Social Care (Labour)

- -

like me. Delighted to hear that about the noble Lady. >> Oral Question Lord Lee of Trafford.

15:08

Oral questions: Effect of companies holding their annual general meetings solely online on individual shareholders’ ability to hold directors to account

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

15:08

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

>> My Lords, the. >> Government announced on the 20th of January that that fully virtual annual general meetings would be included in the upcoming consultation on modernising corporate reporting. Officials are engaging with investors and businesses on the practicalities of this. We will ensure fully virtual meetings only take place where shareholders agree, and that any change is accompanied by appropriate shareholder safeguards co-created with investors and business. A full assessment will be made following the consultation and engagement period.

15:09

Lord Lee of Trafford (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Lord Singh. Too often directors forget that it's shareholders who own the company to hold Agm's entirely, virtually barring shareholders attendance is, in my view, arrogant, unacceptable and sometimes, frankly, cowardly. Institutional shareholders have near continuous access to boards, but the AGM is normally private shareholders only opportunity. And it's not just the formal part of the meeting, but it's the opportunity to meet and question directors in the margins of the meeting. Now, of course, sometimes only a handful of shareholders turn up and yes, there is cost.

But we are talking here of the principle of shareholders rights. Surely the way forward is hybrid agm's with the choice of either virtual or physical attendance? Yes.

15:10

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

The government is not mandating >> The government is not mandating virtual agm's and there will be nothing to stop companies holding hybrid agm's as the people best placed to make decisions about their businesses. We are giving companies and shareholders the legal certainty to undertake fully virtual agm's if it's right for them. Many investor groups in favour of hybrid agm's support fully virtual agm's in extraordinary circumstances, and this legal clarity will provide companies with the certainty they need in those situations.

15:10

Viscount Hailsham (Conservative)

- -

May I suggest that the members of the awkward squad are more readily controlled in virtual meetings, and that is thoroughly undesirable. Much better to have open general meetings where members of the awkward squad can speak out. And what.

15:11

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

What we are doing through the consultation on modernising corporate reporting is, is delivering on our commitment to provide legal clarity on the grey area, on whether companies can hold fully virtual Agm's it will be up to to shareholders and businesses to decide whether to take that forward. And the proposals that we forward. And the proposals that we put forward will be accompanied by appropriate shareholder safeguards. Lord Maude. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.

15:11

Lord Sikka (Labour)

- -

Own companies, they may have controlling rights, but that is not the same as ownership. And besides, shareholders only have a short term interest in companies. Therefore, it is somewhat foolish to leave them in control to direct companies. It is workers and customers who have lifelong interests in companies, and it is time that the government empowered those stakeholders to promote growth and welfare of the whole society.

15:12

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

If my noble friend is is >> If my noble friend is is referring to section 172 of the company's act, which already company's act, which already requires directors to have regard in their decision making to employee interests and the impact on companies operations, on communities and the environment. And that is a very important principle to have.

15:12

Lord Livingston of Parkhead (Non-affiliated)

- -

I have, dear. >> Director, not currently. >> One of many 50 over 50 gems over the last 30 years. Some gems have the last 30 years. Some gems have one attendee or less, some have a few tens, some have hundreds. The cost can often be thousands of pounds per attending shareholder. Given that shareholders can vote remotely, they can ask questions remotely. Should it not be up to the companies to decide which the shareholders can vote on whether they wish to have an in-person AGM, or they wish to do it completely remotely, depending on the company's circumstances.

15:13

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

The noble Lord sets out the rationale for why this is going to form part of the modernising corporate governance consultation, that it is going to be in the hands of the shareholders and the businesses to decide. And in fact, 85% of OECD Factbook countries already allow virtual agm's, including the US, Germany and Japan. And so this will be a proposal to bring the UK into line with other comparable countries. And also just clarify the legal situation.

15:13

Baroness Bottomley of Nettlestone (Conservative)

- -

The. their views. Of course, there's always the awkward squad with stay at home, as we do in this place, that we have to put up with the awkward squad with us and very effective. He is at that. She will know that share actions, provide evidence that online only meetings, allow boards to manipulate the agenda, ignore questions, avoid scrutiny. Investor groups, describe in-person shareholder interactions as the cornerstone of the financial system. Even the FLC. The AGM provides shareholders the opportunity to see the whites of the directors eyes.

And I think my my point of view, it would be a great error to avoid that face to face communication. You know it in politics, we know it in charities. It's the same in business. Even, my Lord, if only one person shows up to your. Absolutely.

15:15

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

The reason we are putting this forward in the modernising corporate reporting consultation is corporate reporting consultation is in order to to clarify the legal situation for fully virtual AGM, as I mentioned, to bring these. The certainty and into line with other international jurisdictions. We are engaging with investors on what those shareholder rights might look like, what the safeguards might be in order if shareholders and businesses do want to move to a fully virtual AGM, exactly what they might be.

So examples could include a five year shareholder votes or or best practice or guidance of that kind.

15:15

Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)

- -

If the noble. >> Baroness prediction. >> That it is. >> Left up to shareholders to make the decision, the institutional the decision, the institutional shareholders will always outvote the individual shareholders. And that's why individual shareholders should have their day. At an AGM. When I organised AGM for the three FTSE companies that I worked for, the chairman and I worked very hard on preparing for the questions that the awkward squad would be coming up with at those agm's to remove the proximity of the shareholder from the chairman is to lose that important, important check.

So will the Minister go back and make sure that this is a firm part of the consultation?

15:16

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

Yeah, yeah. noble Lady have raised the importance of AGM. Agm's are incredibly important. They are important for engaging shareholders, large and small, but particularly as, as, as, as has been mentioned, those who perhaps don't have an institutional voice. And we are engaging with investors on what the shareholder safeguards should be and the shareholder representative organisations. And so that will be taken into account in the consultation.

15:17

Lord Hunt of Wirral (Conservative)

- -

Because one. >> Of the this country's greatest strengths is our financial services strengths is our financial services sector. And yet many of our firms face unnecessary regulatory and administrative burdens that make them make it so much harder to focus on their primary duty, which is to shareholders in the light of the government's commitment to cut regulation by 25%. And given those additional pressures that businesses already face from higher employment costs and growing compliance demands, will the government now set out what specific steps they will take to reduce the regulatory burden on financial services, so that this vital and growing sector can deliver better value for shareholders, attract investment and economic growth.

15:18

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

As as, as the noble Lord >> As as, as the noble Lord mentioned, getting the right regulation and reducing the regulation and reducing the administrative costs is a priority for the for the government. And we have already taken action in many areas to to do that. For example, in in terms of. No longer requiring certain companies to have to produce a strategic report. And we will continue to work through the sectors and across all companies on reducing those administrative costs.

15:18

Lord Leigh of Hurley (Conservative)

- -

To. an investor, I speak as chairman of a public company and senior partner of Cavendish PLC, and we welcome of Cavendish PLC, and we welcome shareholders to come to our AGM. It's quite true. There are some shareholders who go from AGM to AGM with plastic bags hoovering up the biscuits, but there are others who have very valid points to make. And I've been to an AGM of a company with whom I disagreed with vehemently with what the action the directors were taken, and I was able to get my view across.

If that meeting had been virtual, I would have been shut down by the PR. Yeah, yeah.

15:19

Baroness Lloyd of Effra, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Labour)

- -

As I mentioned earlier, we are >> As I mentioned earlier, we are not mandating virtual AGMs and there will be nothing to stop companies continuing to hold hybrid AGM. What we are doing through this consultation is clarifying the legal grey area and providing certainty about the legitimacy of hybrid agm's, where the certain shareholder safeguards are in place. defence.

15:19

Private Notice Question: UK defence: Iranian missile capability

Iranian missile capability Lord Harris of Haringey.

15:19

Lord Harris of Haringey (Labour)

- -

question of which I have given private notice. The question is as follows. To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they Government what assessment they have made of UK homeland defence in light of the long range missile light of the long range missile capabilities demonstrated by Iran in their strike on the Diego Garcia military base. And in so doing, I military base. And in so doing, I draw attention to my registered interest as chair of the National

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Preparedness Commission. My Lords, we. Noble Lords, were aware that the Secretary of State. For.

15:20

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Defence will shortly make a statement in the other place, and I will not pre-empt what he will say. However, I will say that the UK has taken a series of actions to strengthen our collective defence. NATO remains the cornerstone of allied deterrence and defence. NATO's ballistic missile defence system was designed to deal with precisely this type of threat. We have already seen it in action during this crisis, successfully intercepting missiles that were aimed at Turkey. The Mod is strengthening Homeland Security, investing up to £1 billion in capability including air and missile defence, improved munitions stockpiles and readiness at scale to deter and respond to threats.

15:21

Lord Harris of Haringey (Labour)

- -

My Lords, I'm very grateful to >> My Lords, I'm very grateful to my noble friend, the Minister for that response, and I recognise the that response, and I recognise the in fact, I'm reassured by some of what he has said. But the question remains that it looks as though this Iranian capability is not necessarily hugely accurate, and under those circumstances, it may be difficult to be quite so precise in terms of interception. So could I ask what thinking is going on in terms of guidance to people in this country about what to do in the event of some form of alert? Will there be alerts through the telephone emergency system, and what will be the guidance given to people as to what they should do in the event of some form of incoming missile?

15:21

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

The the answer to the noble Lords question is, first of all, Lords question is, first of all, the priority of the government is to intercept any missiles, and the NATO umbrella for that is designed precisely to tackle that of the billion pound munitions. Sorry, the billion pound that I outlined as a result of the SDR. We've committed to air defence. We've already started to spend some of that on various initiatives, including £180 million contract to deliver state of the art land Ceptor missile systems to deal with some of the threat.

But my noble friend is right. Alongside the actions that the government take to intercept the missiles, we need to talk to the public about the potential threats that they may face. Our assessment is that Iran poses no threat at the current time to the UK, but we will, as my noble friend keeps asking us quite rightly, we will take the action it needs to inform the public and tell them what the appropriate action is that they should take in the event of any such threat.

Coming about.

15:22

Baroness Goldie (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, this. geopolitical threat we face and the embarrassing sparseness of readily deployable UK military assets. The first is frightening, the second completely unacceptable. Will the noble Lord, the Minister, confirm that the discredited UK Mauritius Treaty is now dead and beyond resuscitation, and that the excessively indeed embarrassingly delayed defence investment plan will now be elevated to an issue of urgent national security and published immediately.

15:23

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Firstly, on the two direct >> Firstly, on the two direct questions that the noble Baroness has asked me on on the issue of the Defence Investment Plan, I have nothing further to add to what has nothing further to add to what has been said by the Defence Secretary and the Prime Minister that it will be published when it is ready to be published, and we have completed the work on it, which will be as soon as possible on Diego Garcia. Continue discussions, continue on the appropriate way forward with respect to Diego Garcia.

So discussions continue on the treaty. But let me say to the noble Baroness, he, she and I are completely united, as everybody in this House is about the importance of the Diego Garcia base. As we can see at the current time, the difference between us is how best to protect that base. But I take the noble Baroness point. But let me reiterate again we see the basis of. Strategically important for the UK, and we will seek to defend our interests there.

15:24

Lord Purvis of Tweed (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Lord Stern last June, my Lords, last June, our best NATO ally, our last June, our best NATO ally, our biggest NATO ally, said that the Iranian ballistic missile program had been completely obliterated. had been completely obliterated. And President Trump more recently has called NATO both cowardly and unreliable. The UK air defence system is heavily reliant on satellite technology, and when it comes to the UK providing our contracts for this, would it not be better that we have more degree of integrity around our own capability, rather than perhaps rely on political allies of President Trump, who is himself an unreliable partner?

15:24

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Hey. >> Hey. >> I let me let me deal with two separate issues. First of all, should the UK develop its own should the UK develop its own sovereign capability and do as much as we can to have the industry and the intelligence that we need ourselves? Of course we should. And the government is taking action to rebuild and to develop our own capabilities and our own industry. So that part of it, I don't I have to say, with respect to the US, as the Lord has heard me say many times in this Dispatch Box, let's be under no illusions.

The US UK relationship is fundamental to the defence of our nation and fundamental to the protection of our values, not only in this country, but in Europe and across the world, and the intelligence sharing and the military to military cooperation that takes place is still absolutely essential to to the defence of that. And I know the noble Lord agrees with that. And I'm not going to get into what the president has said or what the president has said. All I'm saying is, for the intents of defending this country, our alliance with the United States is fundamental to it, and we should respect it for that.

15:26

Lord Stirrup (Crossbench)

- -

Surely the point here is not the threat from Iranian missiles, which will be operating at extreme range with limited payload and very poor accuracy. But the lessons to be drawn from this conflict are the vulnerability of both military and civilian sites to combine missile and drone attack capabilities, which the which Russia has in abundance, and that the targets that set in the UK would be particularly vulnerable to these. The noble Lord has. The Minister has pointed out some of the investments been made since the SDR, but it is wholly inadequate both to both.

To restore the military capability, we need to defend these islands and to provide the necessary degree of resilience to such attacks. If the government does not do something urgently in terms of financing these capabilities correctly, then this country will be vulnerable to such attacks for years to come.

15:26

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Well done. >> Well done. >> Oh, can I say to the noble and gallant Lord? Of course we await gallant Lord? Of course we await the defence investment plan. But we're not just we're not waiting for that before we do things. I've pointed out about the investment that we've made into some air defence systems already, but he's quite right to point out that we need to make progress at pace as quickly as we can to defend against potential missile threats, but also the drone threats, which he quite rightly points out.

So we are assessing what we can do. We are trying to work at pace with respect to that, and we will do all we can to protect our country, which, as everyone says, is the first duty of any government.

15:27

Lord West of Spithead (Labour)

- -

My Lords, I think we've got to realise it is almost impossible to defend against exoatmospheric ballistic missiles trying to strike one's country. Indeed, those are what the nuclear warheads. If Russia ever goes to war, nuclear wise will be coming towards us. These are hugely expensive and really difficult to take down. Drones are a different issue, and I agree with the noble and gallant Lord Stirrup. We actually have to start spending some money there. But could I ask a slightly different question? We never, ever nowadays go to war.

Even when I fought in the Falklands wasn't war. We never go to war. If someone starts lobbing missiles at once. Population. That is war, isn't it? Would we go to war? And if you go to war, there are a whole raft of things that a nation does, some of them quite horrifying. And we haven't done those. But surely we would do that if people started trying to kill our public with drones in our major cities.

15:28

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Yeah. hypotheticals of what may or may not happen in the future in terms of where this to happen, what would be the reaction of the government? I do think in terms of what's happening at the present time with respect to Iran, I think the way the government and the Prime Minister has handled this has been something of which he can take credit, and the government should take credit, and indeed, the way in which the the public have responded can also take credit, because we we didn't join in the offensive action to to start with.

But as soon as we saw the indiscriminate retaliation from Iran, threatening our citizens, threatening our interests and threatening our partners and allies in the region, who themselves were astounded by the indiscriminate response of the of the Iranians. The government did not stand by it, didn't say it wasn't going to get involved, but what it was going to get involved because it was a legitimate legal basis to do so, was defensive action, which did all it could to protect ourselves from that threat. I think it's a realistic way to respond and is a strong way to respond.

At the same time, whilst abiding by international law.

15:29

Lord Polak (Conservative)

- -

My Lords, my Lords, I will not dwell on it, but the disgusting

**** Possible New Speaker ****

destruction in Golders Green last night was despicable. Yeah, yeah. Now over 20 we're told that

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Now over 20 we're told that there are there are over 120 IRGC there are there are over 120 IRGC linked plots under investigation here in the UK. And I won't ask the here in the UK. And I won't ask the question why the noble Lord, the Minister has changed his mind on the IRGC. But I really would like the IRGC. But I really would like to understand how is the government assessing the combined threat of external missile capability and internal hostile activity directed by Iran?

15:30

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

Can I just start by saying the whole House would totally agree with what the noble order has just with what the noble order has just said about the abhorrent attacks, the anti-Semitic attacks in Golders Green, absolutely disgraceful and play no part in our society at all. Can I can I also say on the the IRGC, the government continues to keep that under review and that he will know that there's been many changes of opinion. When I look at some of the votes that took place 2 or 3 years ago, it's quite interesting if noble Lords wants to see that and see who voted for what.

But yes, indeed. But on the serious point, the other serious point he makes about what what assessment? The government of course, the government works very closely with the services to ensure that we keep under review any threats, and he will know that. What I can say is that we can be thankful for the work of our services and the work that they do to keep us all safe, but that work continues.

15:31

Lord Spellar (Labour)

- -

I take account of the point. >> Raised by the by the Minister regarding the direct threat from Iranian territory. However, is there not a long standing concern about the increasing grip of jihadist groups in northern in northern Africa with the ability to be supplied by Iran, given that they're already often sponsored by Iran, and then the ability to launch again, to launch on a route for which there is not the NATO defence that rightly is focussed on the eastern side of the of the NATO alliance, but does make Madrid, Paris and London very vulnerable.

15:31

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

My noble friend makes an important and a good point about instability in other regions. Obviously the focus at the present time is around the Middle East, but we clearly see problems in North Africa and and wider. I only met in in West Africa with Nigeria last week to talk about some of the things that my noble friend is talking about and of course, any assessment of where we go to in the future and what we do has to take account of not only threats that we face now, but of threats that we may face in the future.

And it's difficult to have a crystal ball, but I think all of us need to look at what some of the problems that are occurring and see how they may impact on us in our own homeland, rather than believing it's thousands of miles away and will never have any impact.

15:32

Viscount Hailsham (Conservative)

- -

I suggest that there is now widespread public support for very widespread public support for very substantial and very rapid increase in expenditure on defence.

15:32

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

As well as the noble Lord will know the discussions continue around that. I think, as the around that. I think, as the British public consider the threats that they face and consider the the turmoil that there is in certain turmoil that there is in certain parts of the world. There will be an interesting debate about that. I know from certainly from talking to many people that, frankly don't share the noble Lords opinion, who would rather see money spent on other things health, pensions, schools, children, all of those sorts of things.

But my my own view of this is that the first priority of government is you have to defend your country. And some of the rights that everybody enjoys are only there because of people who fought in the past. Hopefully nobody will have to fight again. But let's remember that and remember that that includes that needs defence spending to fund it.

15:33

Baroness Antrobus (Labour)

- -

By Lord Birt Lord Sentamu. >> My Lords, I would argue that societal resilience is very much part of a country's aura. How it comes across to its adversaries, comes across to its adversaries, how it's perceived, and that adds to our deterrence presence. Some of us heard from President Zelensky last week about what it is like to live from constant fear of attack from the air, and how that affects everything in life. I'm in reinforcing my noble friend's point and questions earlier.

I would like to say that I think now is the perfect time to use the opportunity, and it's a terrible word, but the fact that we're seeing what's happening playing out in the Middle East, now is the time to have a direct conversation with the public. And I mean this week, next week, in the next few weeks, because they are focussed on that. And I think it's super urgent that we do that.

15:34

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

It's just very urgent to have that conversation. And I think everybody understands that and everybody understands that and accepts that. And going back to the noble Lords point about defence spending, it requires that conversation. So that will take place. Can I pick up the other point I have said from this Dispatch Box time and again that the NATO, ourselves and many of our friends and allies, we need to discover the theory of deterrence. You prevent war by preparing for war. You prevent war by people believing that you will actually respond if something takes place where they break international law.

And so I think that is a really important point. The rediscovery of deterrence is important. But my noble friend's point about having a national conversation about that is really important.

15:34

Lord Fox (Liberal Democrat)

- -

Well, obviously. different occasions without mentioning the defence investment plan. It would be remiss of your Lordships if we didn't go back to the Minister and say, when is this plan going to be published? Our credibility in NATO requires us to demonstrate the spending that has been announced. So when will the plan be published?

15:35

Lord Coaker, The Minister of State, Ministry of Defence (Labour)

- -

I'm hoping the noble Lord was going to start with the Leona Leonardo's announcement, which he pressed me for in terms of spending pressed me for in terms of spending and what. OK, that's we pocketed that one and moved on. But I mean, the, the the but I mean, Leonardo's was a huge investment that the noble Lord was demanding that I do something about. I went back, argued with the department, talk to other Ministers. So I just make the point. There is a point about defence in the investment plan, and I answered the noble Baroness with respect to that.

But let's be clear. Defence is not standing still. There are. There are many projects on the. In Scotland, on the Clyde and Rosyth ships being built in the Plymouth Dockyard. Billions of pounds being spent on the dockyards being built. Billions of pounds being spent on renovating military housing, Leonardo's helicopters that. The contracts that I announced earlier on. So, of course, there's a debate about what the total sum of money should be, what the total outlay by the government should be. And we heard from the noble and gallant Lord Lord Stewart and my noble friend Lord Best about those matters.

But the the the belief that the government is not spending anything, not doing anything, we should dispel that because there's billions of pounds worth of investment being being put into the defence of this country, including as we progress into the air and missile defence of the country. And I think that's something we could also be proud of and actually talk about, as well as the challenges that we face.

15:36

Business of the House

Yeah. >> My Lords, this. >> May be a convenient moment for members who don't wish to stay for the next business. When the occupant of the Woolsack is on her feet or his feet, members in the chamber should not be on theirs. By By Lord's By Lord's report By Lord's report of By Lord's report of the By Lord's report of the Pension

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Schemes Bill Baroness Sherlock. My Lords, I beg to move that report.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The question is that the Bill be now further considered on report as many that opinion say, content of the contrary, not content. the the contrary, not content. the contents have it after clause 96, amendment 120 Lord Palmer of Childs

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Hill. My my Lords. In leading once

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My my Lords. In leading once again on this on this bill, I would say, my Lords, this group is bound together by a simple question is

15:38

Lord Palmer of Childs Hill (Liberal Democrat)

- -

the pension system working as it should for its members? And do we have the evidence that justice properly. The proposed reviews on consolidation, access to impartial consolidation, access to impartial pension advice. Injustices. Injustices experienced by scheme Injustices experienced by scheme members. Communications and data accuracy all go to trust, fairness accuracy all go to trust, fairness and whether savers can navigate the system with confidence from these benches. We think these are legitimate concerns. Consolidation may bring efficiencies, but it can also reduce competition and choice if left unchecked.

Better access to impartial advice is plainly in members interests, especially at key decision points. And if data is inaccurate or communications unclear, even a well designated, well designed system can fail the people it's meant to serve. In the amendments in my name, I'm pleased to have raised the issues of competition, access to impartial pensions, advice and injustice experienced by scheme members. These are matters I raised at the Committee stage of this bill, and I appreciate Baroness Sherlock and her colleagues in government's time in responding on the amendments in my name, in this group and with all the pressures upon us, I'm going to bring my remarks to an end and will bring my remarks to an end and will not use my Lords time any further, and I beg to move.

and I beg to move.

15:40

Baroness Altmann (Non-affiliated)

- -

Amendment proposed after clause 96 insert the following new clause is printed on the Marshalled List.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Sorry my Lords, I just arrived briefly to support amendment 1112. Oh in the name of the noble Lord

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Oh in the name of the noble Lord Palmer, I think it is important to look at the issues. That he has.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

That he has. Rightly raised in relation to the market and indeed, amendment 165 is particularly important given that the injustices, some of which we will come on to in later groups, seem to have little redress roots, whereas I think it would be incumbent upon us for a good pension system to have a better system to identify and remedy occupational pension injustices. I'd just like briefly to speak to my amendment 160, which is about having a review to ensure data in pension schemes must be accurate.

There at the moment is no legal requirement to ensure that the amounts of money being paid into pension schemes for auto enrolment workers or anyone else. But I'm particularly concerned about auto enrolment have to be correct. The pensions regulator has to make sure pension contributions are being paid, but there isn't this requirement to make sure the amount of money is the correct amount of money. So what I'm trying to suggest is that in the Pensions Act 2008, the Quality Requirements requirement section should include something that will confirm regular checking of the pension contributions in the clauses about regulations relating to deducting contributions.

These must require employers to obtain confirmation from trustees or managers that the amounts paid in are regularly checked and recorded and corrected as soon as possible, and in the requirements to keep records section schemes have to provide confirmation that regular data accuracy checks and contribution verification, including the amounts of tax relief and National Insurance relief, are correctly reported. As so often I have seen pension scheme records riddled with errors. So, my Lords, it is surprising that the requirements to actually make sure the amounts of money going in are correct are not in the legislation, and I would be interested to hear the comments of the noble Lady on the front bench.

As to the government's thinking on whether this might be something they will consider.

15:43

Baroness Stedman-Scott (Conservative)

- -

Put it right this time. OK. My Lords, I rise to speak broadly in support of this group of amendments. support of this group of amendments. They reflect a thoughtful and welcome focus from across the House on some of the most important structural issues within our pension system. In particular, I welcome the attention given by noble Lords to the effects of consolidation on competition and market entry, and to the importance of robust data accuracy checks. A market that consolidates without sufficient scrutiny, risks reducing innovation and choice, while poor data integrity undermines trust at its very foundation.

These are therefore welcome points of focus, and I thank the noble Lord, Lord Palmer, and the noble Baroness Altmann for raising them. However, I will speak primarily to amendment 169 in my name and that of my noble friend. This amendment would require a review of pension, communications and financial promotion laws, examining whether the current framework unduly restricts providers from communicating clearly with members, particularly in relation to risks, guidance and comparative information. This is, I believe, a profoundly important issue.

My Lords, the reality is this pensions are complex, technical and often opaque. For many people. They're also distant, something to be thought about later rather than now. But that distance is illusionary. These, the decisions made or not made today will shape financial security decades into the future. Knowledge in this area is power. Yet too often individuals lack both the information and the confidence to engage meaningfully with their pensions. Communications can be overly cautious, overly technical, or constrained in ways that make it difficult for providers to present information in a way that is clear, comparative, and genuinely useful.

We have heard several times from our discussions with industry at that professionals can be hesitant to provide what would be sound and helpful advice because of concerns that rules like those set out in the privacy and electronic communications regulations, can impose significant uncertainty and burdens on pension providers and make it more difficult to provide scheme members with timely and helpful information. The result is confusing disengagement and in turn, poorer outcomes. Our amendment asked a fundamental question are we striking the right balance between protecting consumers and empowering

Feed Live - Click to view video

Return to start of debate - Return to top of page