To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.

Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Speech in Grand Committee - Tue 03 Feb 2026
Pension Schemes Bill

"My Lords, everyone—apart from insurers, perhaps, who prefer buyout and the regulatory cash bonus it brings them—is in favour of superfunds. They should improve member benefit security. They can enhance members’ benefits, as the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, just said. They can return cash to employers when appropriate, supporting UK …..."
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted - View Speech

View all Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Pension Schemes Bill
Speech in Grand Committee - Tue 03 Feb 2026
Pension Schemes Bill

"My Lords, I support the general issues that the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, has raised. Of course, if this whole clause were deleted, the amendment that I am seeking in addition would disappear.

I want to speak to my amendment which is about new Section 117D(2), which says:

“The best …..."
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted - View Speech

View all Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Pension Schemes Bill
Speech in Grand Committee - Tue 03 Feb 2026
Pension Schemes Bill

"I appreciate that the response was prepared on the basis of the wording, and I accept that my “evidence” wording was a marker. But will the Minister please look up what the legal “reasonably likely” really does imply? She does not have to take my word for it; I did …..."
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted - View Speech

View all Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Pension Schemes Bill
Speech in Grand Committee - Tue 03 Feb 2026
Pension Schemes Bill

"I have not intervened on this group because I have not really delved into it. I wonder whether the Minister will go into some of the points she is making. Obviously, there are cases where you want consolidation in order to produce a solution that gives a reasonable retirement income, …..."
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted - View Speech

View all Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Pension Schemes Bill
Division Vote (Lords)
3 Feb 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 57 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 0 Liberal Democrat No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 295 Noes - 180
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 52 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 0 Liberal Democrat No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 255 Noes - 183
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 49 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 0 Liberal Democrat No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 231 Noes - 147
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (LD) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 55 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 0 Liberal Democrat No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 67 Noes - 191
Written Question
Civil Proceedings: Legal Costs
Wednesday 28th January 2026

Asked by: Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact that introducing legislation to reverse the effect of R (on the application of PACCAR Inc and others) v Competition Appeal Tribunal and others [2023] UKSC 28 will have on the review into the opt-out collective actions regime.

Answered by Baroness Lloyd of Effra - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government intends to implement recommendations made by the Civil Justice Council to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment, alongside proportionate regulation of litigation funding to improve transparency and fairness for all.

The review of opt-out collective actions is focused on finding the right balance between preserving an important route to redress for those harmed by anti-competitive behaviour and ensuring that the burden on business is proportionate. Work on litigation funding is distinct from the review, but will complement it and is expected to support the smooth operating of the regime.

Written Question
Foreign Investment in UK
Monday 26th January 2026

Asked by: Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have made an assessment of the risks to inward investment and perceived cost of doing business in the UK of facilitating an increase in funder-backed collective actions.

Answered by Baroness Lloyd of Effra - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

Funders enable access to justice when litigation costs are high. This is often the case for group litigation, including opt-out collective actions relating to competition issues. These claims play an important role in the competition enforcement landscape, and safeguarding competitive markets is to the benefit of consumers, businesses, and the UK economy.

However, litigation risk for businesses should be proportionate. Opt-out collective actions are under review, and a consultation on potential improvements will be published in due course. The Government is also working to implement proportionate regulation of litigation funding to improve transparency and fairness.