Question

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to put forward a candidate for the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in 2027; and if so, (1) what the process to select that candidate will be, and (2) how they intend to support that candidate.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

This Government is fully committed to fulfilling its obligations under the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and recognises the important role the CEDAW Committee plays in holding States Parties to account in implementing the treaty.

The UK takes a strategic approach to multilateral elections, running a small number of high priority campaigns each year. As with all UN bodies, the Government will carefully consider whether to nominate a UK representative for future vacancies which will arise to the CEDAW Committee, including in 2028. It remains the UK’s ambition to demonstrate leadership on promoting gender equality which aligns with CEDAW’s principles.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government what recent assessment they have made of progress on repairing Hammersmith Bridge; and when they estimate that the work will be finished and the bridge re-opened to traffic.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

As the asset owner, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham may choose to apply for further project funding for Hammersmith Bridge through the new Structures Fund, which launched on 15 April 2026. Any application will be assessed alongside other applications to the fund, and further project updates will be made available in due course.

Question

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to consult on which protected characteristics will be included in the data collection requirements to bring section 106 of the Equality Act 2010 into force; and what steps they will take to ensure that section 106 is operational in time for the next general election.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Government is committed to commencing section 106 of the Equality Act 2010, requiring registered political parties to publish anonymised data relating to the diversity of their candidate selections in accordance with regulations.

Office for Equality and Opportunity officials are currently carrying out the preparatory work needed to commence the provision under section 106.

Careful consideration needs to be given to how it might be implemented, the necessary supporting regulations and whether any phasing might be needed in implementation, as well as the specifics with regards to data collection.

Officials will engage with stakeholders, including political parties, in due course. In the meantime it remains open to registered parties to publish their own candidate diversity data.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the UN Women report The Cost of War in Gaza on Women and Girls, published on 17 April, particularly that fatalities of Gazan women and girls in the two years of conflict constitute approximately 53% of all fatalities, an increase from between 15% and 22% in previous conflicts.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

The finding that more than 38,000 women and girls have been killed is appalling and underlines the devastating impacts of this conflict, in addition to the equally appalling evidence of sexual violence. Through our humanitarian and early recovery programmes, we have provided funding to the International Civil Society Action Network to fund Women's Alliance for Security Leadership members to deliver conflict related sexual violence response and prevention work in their communities.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the sexual and reproductive violence against Gazan women and girls; and what steps they are taking to address this.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

The finding that more than 38,000 women and girls have been killed is appalling and underlines the devastating impacts of this conflict, in addition to the equally appalling evidence of sexual violence. Through our humanitarian and early recovery programmes, we have provided funding to the International Civil Society Action Network to fund Women's Alliance for Security Leadership members to deliver conflict related sexual violence response and prevention work in their communities.

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of reports of the rise in the amount of non-stun meat being exported; and what estimate have they made of exports of non-stun meat for each of the last five years.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

This Government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter. However, this Government respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs.

The Food Standards Agency carries out a periodic, one-week Slaughter Sector Survey in England and Wales. In the last five years, two surveys have been carried out in 2022 and 2024. Direct comparison between these surveys is difficult due to the high proportion of responses for the destination of meat in 2024 recorded as ‘unknown’, because that particular survey question is not mandatory.

For sheep, 32% of non-stun meat was recorded as exported in 2022, with 0% recorded as having an unknown destination. In 2024, 3% of non-stun meat from sheep was recorded as exported, with 36% recorded as having an unknown destination.

For meat chickens, the proportion of non-stun meat recorded as exported was 5% in 2022, compared to none recorded as exported in 2024. In both years, a further 1-2% of non-stun meat was recorded as having an unknown destination.

Copies of the 2022 and 2024 Survey Reports are attached. The 2026 Survey will be published later this year.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 17 June (HL476), whether they have made progress on the strengthening of Hammersmith Bridge; and when they expect Hammersmith Bridge to reopen for traffic.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

As the asset owner, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham may choose to apply for further project funding for the next stage of ‘Strengthening’ works on Hammersmith Bridge through the new Structures Fund, which launched on 15 April 2026. Any application will be assessed alongside other applications to the fund, and further project updates will be made available in due course.

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government what timetable they have set for laying a statutory instrument to outline the activity regulations for the implementation of the Animals (Low Welfare Activities Abroad) Act 2023; what measurable outcomes have resulted from their engagement with stakeholders, including those in the tourism industry; and what progress has been made beyond stakeholder consultation towards implementation of that Act.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

The Animals (Low Welfare Activities Abroad) Act 2023 provides a framework for the introduction of future bans on the advertising and offering for sale, in England and Northern Ireland, of low-welfare animal activities taking place abroad.

As set out in the animal welfare strategy published in December 2025, Defra is continuing to explore both legislative and non-legislative options to stop the advertising of low-welfare animal activities abroad and will set out next steps in due course.

Defra officials encourage stakeholders to consider how best they can influence tourists to avoid unintentionally participating in low welfare animal activities.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they reject project licence applications under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 because they deliberately inflict unacceptable levels of pain on animals.

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA), any procedure carried out for a qualifying scientific or educational purpose which may cause a level of pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm equivalent to, or higher than that caused by the insertion of a needle is assessed on a case by case basis using a harm-benefit analysis.

A licence will not be granted If the likely harms to animals, including pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm, are not justified by the expected benefits, or where the requirements of the 3Rs (Replacement, Reduction and Refinement) are not met.

Where a proposed programme of work would involve unacceptable levels of harm (beyond the lawful category of ‘severe’), or where those harms cannot be adequately minimised, the application would not be authorised.

All authorised work must remain within expected severity limits. Any exceedance of these limits would be treated as non-compliance and subject to investigation and enforcement action.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the ethical implications of the projects (1) ‘Neuronal Basis of Somatosensorial and Pathological Pain’, and (2) ‘Spinal circuits underlying pain sensation’ included in the Home Office report Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986: Non-technical summaries for project licences granted January – March 2026 that require a retrospective assessment, published on 11 June; in particular in relation to the impacts on mice used in the projects and why so many mice have were used.

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

These projects sit within the Government’s broader strategy to support research that advances the understanding of major public health challenges. The non-technical summaries explain that most animals used in the Spinal circuits underlying pain sensation project are expected to experience effects below the legal threshold for a regulated procedure or mild adverse effects, with a smaller proportion expected to experience moderate or severe effects. For the Neuronal Basis of Somatosensorial and Pathological Pain project, the majority of animals are expected to experience mild or moderate adverse effects. These anticipated harms were considered as part of the harm-benefit analysis undertaken before the licences were granted. The licence applicants estimated animal numbers based on previous experience of conducting similar research, statistical advice and established experimental design tools, including National Centre for the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement) resources.

All project licence applications under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) are assessed by medically or veterinary qualified inspectors within the Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU). Under ASPA, no project can be granted without a harm-benefit analysis, where an ASRU inspector makes a rigorous assessment of the scientific rationale for the programme of work and must be satisfied that the harms of the proposed project are justified by the likely benefits. Inspectors also assess the appropriateness of the scientific methods proposed and whether the legal requirements of replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs) have been met. This means that animal use cannot be approved if a practicable non-animal alternative exists, the number of animals used must be the minimum necessary to achieve the objectives of the research, and procedures must be refined to reduce pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm.

This Government has also committed to the long-term goal of phasing out animal testing in science and research in all but exceptional circumstances. In November 2025, the Government published Replacing animals in science: a strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, backed by £75 million in funding.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what emergency humanitarian response plans they have to prevent the worsening of humanitarian needs and mass displacement in El Obeid, Sudan.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Further to the answers provided in the Private Notice Question debate on 24 June, the UK is continuing to use its role as UN Security Council penholder to urge an immediate end to the violence in El Obeid, in concert with our fellow members of the Coalition for Atrocity Prevention for Sudan, and other international partners.

On 3 July, the UK convened an Urgent Debate at the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in El Obeid, and on 6 July, we secured the adoption by consensus of a UK-led resolution, condemning - and calling for an urgent inquiry by the UN Fact-Finding Mission into - recently reported atrocities.

We will continue using every lever available over the coming days and weeks to try and prevent the mass civilian casualties in El Obeid that we all fear.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to prevent further sexual violence in Sudan; whether they are collecting evidence of those who have suffered sexual violence; and what plans they have to hold perpetrators to account.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

The UK remains determined to tackle the abhorrent levels of conflict related sexual violence (CRSV) against women and girls in Sudan, including the widespread use of rape as a weapon of war.

Since the start of the conflict, we have prioritised work on protection, prevention and care services, providing access to vital medical and psychological care, supporting survivors' families, and supporting women-led organisations to deliver essential services on-the-ground. Earlier this year, the Foreign Secretary announced a further £20 million of funding for these activities after meeting survivors in the border town of Adré.

Alongside our atrocity prevention work, the UK is also committed to gathering evidence of atrocities to support future prosecutions. We led efforts to establish the UN Fact-Finding Mission and have secured its mandate extension for two successive years. We also supported the deployment of a specialist sexual and gender-based violence investigator last year, and through our Sudan Witness programme, we are supporting Sudanese human rights defenders to document violations and abuses, including evidence of CRSV, to ensure Sudanese civil society can build a foundation for justice. We have also earmarked funding for development of a women-led investigations network.

We need urgent action from across the international community now, including international criminal investigations into the atrocities committed to date, to ensure accountability for the perpetrators, justice for victims, and an end to the systematic campaign of sexual violence against Sudanese women and girls.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government further to the remarks by Baroness Chapman of Darlington on 24 June (HL Debs cols 663–6), what imminent steps will be taken to protect civilians from the risk of violence and atrocities in El Obeid.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Further to the answers provided in the Private Notice Question debate on 24 June, the UK is continuing to use its role as UN Security Council penholder to urge an immediate end to the violence in El Obeid, in concert with our fellow members of the Coalition for Atrocity Prevention for Sudan, and other international partners.

On 3 July, the UK convened an Urgent Debate at the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in El Obeid, and on 6 July, we secured the adoption by consensus of a UK-led resolution, condemning - and calling for an urgent inquiry by the UN Fact-Finding Mission into - recently reported atrocities.

We will continue using every lever available over the coming days and weeks to try and prevent the mass civilian casualties in El Obeid that we all fear.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what actions and diplomatic engagement they are undertaking to prevent further weapons and resources being accessed by the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Further to the answers provided in the Private Notice Question debate on 24 June, the UK is continuing to use its role as UN Security Council penholder to urge an immediate end to the violence in El Obeid, in concert with our fellow members of the Coalition for Atrocity Prevention for Sudan, and other international partners.

On 3 July, the UK convened an Urgent Debate at the UN Human Rights Council on the situation in El Obeid, and on 6 July, we secured the adoption by consensus of a UK-led resolution, condemning - and calling for an urgent inquiry by the UN Fact-Finding Mission into - recently reported atrocities.

We will continue using every lever available over the coming days and weeks to try and prevent the mass civilian casualties in El Obeid that we all fear.

Found: Andrews Baroness Browning Baroness Cass Lord Dholakia Baroness Freeman of Steventon Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews Baroness Browning Baroness Cass Lord Dholakia Baroness Freeman of Steventon Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews; Baroness Browning; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews; Baroness Browning; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: (Chair) Baroness Andrews Baroness Cass Lord Dholakia Baroness Freeman of Steventon Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews; Baroness Browning; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews; Baroness Browning; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Andrews Baroness Browning Baroness Cass Lord Dholakia Baroness Freeman of Steventon Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Chair); Baroness Andrews; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger

Found: Chair); Baroness Andrews; Baroness Cass; Lord Dholakia; Baroness Freeman of Steventon; Baroness Hodgson of Abinger