Retirement and Participation Committee Report

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 16th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I begin by joining the queue of noble Lords who have paid tribute to my noble friend Lady Taylor of Bolton and the committee for the work that they did—they produced a good report. I know they did not publish any of the evidence, but I hope that historians of the future will have access to that evidence as part of the business of explaining how the House has evolved over the years. I do not, in fact, envy my noble friend the Leader of the House for the job of trying to sum up today’s debate, given the range of speakers we have had so far and what is still to come.

Is there any Member here who does not have an interest in the outcome of this debate? The answer is: I doubt it. I am sure many Members looked at the report and, the moment they saw it, turned to the point at which they would know their own end date. I am no exception, but I hope the House will understand if I say that I have been here before and, for the most of the last two and a half years, I was only too conscious of the fact of the effects of the final day of the previous Session.

The whole House knows the significance of the issues identified in the report, and they arise as a result of a manifesto commitment by my party at the last election, but I admit to being slightly conflicted by two arguments. One is that it should be for the Government themselves to bring forward proposals on a mandatory retirement age, if that is what is planned; the other is that it is perhaps better for this House to take what action it can, because the government Bill considered by the Commons might well find itself broadened well beyond the subject matter of this report. On balance, I can see the case for us to take action ourselves where our objectives can be achieved by non-legislative means.

There is a broader context to this debate. It is both about the case for reducing the size of the House and about our relationship with the House of Commons. The other night, we listened to my noble friend Lord Rooker make some very persuasive points about the extent to which it increasingly falls to us to scrutinise government legislation that the same Government themselves effectively prevent the House of Commons considering properly by the use of the timetable Motion and the guillotine. Meanwhile, efforts in this House to reduce our size—I pay tribute to the work of the noble Lord, Lord Burns, and others—have not yet succeeded and cannot, partly because we have no ability effectively to reduce the power of prime ministerial patronage, hence the proposals before us today.

I admit to being ambivalent about the retirement age, though I appreciate the committee’s suggested phasing in of it over a number of years. Why? It is not just because it jars with the principles of discrimination against people who are older, and we live in a country where the population itself is getting older. Funnily enough, I bumped into a group of schoolchildren today when I was in the House early this morning and I asked them, “Do you think it is unfair that you should throw people out of Parliament at the age of 80?” Amazingly, the vast majority of that school group put up their hands and said that, yes, they thought it was unfair. It was quite interesting. I am slightly nervous about a fixed retirement age. It would never be applied to the House of Commons for this reason: you could never restrict the rights of the electorate to elect whomever they wish to serve in that place.

I know that there are many Members of this House who are over 80 and who make an extraordinary contribution, and continue to do so, to the work of the House. A mention was made of Lord Mackay of Clashfern. I was sitting on the Benches opposite when he made his final remarks on leaving the House. He was cogent. He made some very good points. He said he had reached the view that he had reassessed certain legislation, even though he had introduced that legislation decades earlier. He was 95. My point really is that capacity is perhaps a better guide than mere age to what matters.

By contrast, there are Members decades younger than that noble Lord who do not often come, speak or vote—in short, they do not often participate. In my opinion, this can bring the House into disrepute. That is why I find myself in much greater sympathy with the report’s recommendations on participation. I entirely understand the reference to the risks of performative activity, but the right balance has to be found to enable the House to fulfil its core functions: scrutinising legislation, holding the Government of the day to account, engaging in committee work and raising issues for debate. I think the report’s recommendations are a stage further forward.

I end by saying this: I am one of those Members who regards this place as a workshop and not a museum. I consider myself a working Peer, and it was on that basis that I stood for election to this House. I will listen to the rest of the debate with great interest. In my experience of this place, which goes well beyond my time here—it will be five years this month since I first arrived—incremental change is usually what works best.

Direction of Government

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

First, I am grateful that the noble and right reverend Lord is remembering both our Prime Ministers in his prayers; I am sure they will appreciate that. The noble and right reverend Lord is right to highlight the work of Prime Minister Starmer on international issues. When he became Prime Minister, I do not think it was anticipated or expected that we would see so many international issues at crisis point and needing intervention. As a result of his premiership, our country is more valued and respected on the international stage than it was previously. Even today, Prime Minister Burnham will be talking to President Macron, and they will be building on the work of the coalition of the willing, which has been so important in Ukraine.

On good government and Governments taking on their own Back-Benchers, the important thing with Governments that have both large and small majorities is to work with and listen to people. Among Labour MPs, I see engagement and a real willingness to deal with issues such as welfare reform and the Budget. The key thing is always how it is done. The measures that were taken last time included providing people with disabilities with the ability to test work to see if it works for them. If it does not work, they can go back on benefits, but we try to give them support to go into work. Those kinds of measures will be warmly welcomed. Talking to MPs—last night I was with Back-Bench MPs in the Commons—I see a real willingness to engage with this issue and ensure that we do better for those people who are not in employment or education, who are not earning or learning; they cannot be written off. The determination is there. It is not a case of taking it on but of listening to and working with people to get the best possible result for those who need work, and for the country as a whole through the benefit that will bring to our economy.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, the Prime Minister’s Statement refers to the rewiring of the British state and poses the question of

“who, in government, drives growth?”

In that context, can my noble friend the Lord Privy Seal tell the House what role is envisaged for the new Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade? There is no doubt that, if we are going to achieve the growth that we want, we will have to utilise the science and technology expertise in this country, not just to grow businesses but to ensure that they remain in the UK.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My noble friend brings his experience of science to his question. This is absolutely crucial. If we do not have innovation or new technologies, we are not going to maximise the potential for growth. It is significant that, when we look at these issues and at where the advantages and disadvantages are, particularly on AI, we see for the first time around the Cabinet table a Minister with direct responsibility for AI. He will look at where it brings benefits and at where there are problems that need to be addressed.

My noble friend talked about rewiring the state, but we are bringing the talents of all departments together. That is part of the role of No. 10 North, where there will be one door for people to go through. People will not have to go to different departments; there will be better co-ordination. The No. 10 Delivery Unit here in London will also be an important part of showing how you can make a difference. Once you have got the policy, you have to make sure the policy works. Too often, across all Governments, we pass legislation, step back and wait for it to happen. If we are going to bring change, we need to know that that legislation is there for a reason, and we need to make sure we implement it and that it has effect.

Digital ID: Public Consultation

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 18th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I do not agree at all. I think that 14% of people do not have some of the things that the noble Baroness referred to, but the world is changing very fast and if we are to address financial exclusion, inclusion and accessibility, this process can address many of those concerns. As I said, there are community organisations and community services. For example, many people use their post office, and we want to ensure they have that choice. We are moving into a world, as she rightly said, where banks are determining how they will provide services and Tesco is determining what I can buy or what I should buy using data supplied to it. The world is changing and it is about time that, first, the state caught up in provision of public services and, secondly, the public can determine what data is used for what purpose. That is why this is a good idea.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome my noble friend’s points about the consultation process; there is a great deal to consult about. As one Tesco consumer to another, can my noble friend confirm that, almost irrespective of the consultation, the Government are determined to allow an individual, if they wish, to delete their digital ID? If there is any more that the Minister can say about the circumstances in which a digital ID might be withdrawn from an individual by the state, I would be grateful to hear his thoughts.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

Let me address the first question. This is not a mandatory scheme and, certainly, if people have a digital ID, they can say they do not want it. I do not anticipate any circumstances where a Government would want to take away something that lets people access public services, but I hope the consultation will result in a much more open and transparent debate so that we focus much more on the needs of the public rather than what we think a Government might do.

China and Japan

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 4th February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

My Lords, it is a key issue. It is important that the Prime Minister, for the first time since Jimmy Lai has been in prison, was able to raise this issue face to face with the Chinese—that has not happened before. I do not think that any of us will be satisfied until Jimmy Lai is released; that is the only point at which we will be satisfied with all the engagement that is taking place. I give the noble Baroness a categorical assurance that this issue is being raised at every opportunity and that we will continue to raise it until he is released.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome the Statement and the Prime Minister’s visit to Japan and China. As the Leader of the Opposition said, such visits are a vital part of the work of every Prime Minister. The Statement on China refers to a dedicated dialogue on cyber security. Can my noble friend tell the House any more about what that might involve?

G20 and Ukraine

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 26th November 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

There is not much more I can say because these discussions are continually ongoing. The Prime Minister, when he answered questions on the Statement in the House of Commons yesterday, made clear the huge amount of ongoing military work and how that will operate in practice. These are operational matters that will have to be worked through with all the other countries, to see what part they can play. These are military plans that will be put into effect when they are needed.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome the chance to discuss the Statement. This is an extremely difficult time for Ukraine—heaven knows that what they have had to live through over the past three and a half years has been difficult enough. It is also a test for the coalition of the willing. I join my noble friend Lord Dubs in paying tribute to the work that the Prime Minister has done in this regard. As this potential peace process unfolds, at what stage does my noble friend the Leader of the House understand it is envisaged that Russia and President Putin would be welcomed back into the G7, which would become the G8 again? That might be a difficult part of the process.

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

I think my noble friend is getting a little ahead of where discussions are at the moment. While these discussions are ongoing, the most I can say is that our support for Ukraine remains absolutely ironclad—there is no dispute or ambiguity about that. The person responsible for the illegal invasion of Ukraine is Putin; the responsibility cannot be laid at any place other than his door. He can deliver peace immediately just by withdrawing from Ukraine. Until these matters are resolved, we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves.

Deep Sea Mining in International Waters

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Monday 30th June 2025 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Viscount Stansgate]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what representations they have made to the International Seabed Authority and the government of the United States of America about plans to enable deep-sea mining in international waters.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Lord Collins of Highbury) (Lab)]

My Lords, the United Kingdom supports a moratorium on the granting of exploration contracts by the International Seabed Authority until sufficient scientific evidence is available to assess the potential impact of deep sea mining on marine ecosystems and strong, enforceable regulations are adopted by the ISA. The Government note the US executive order. As a party to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the United Kingdom is committed to the continued work of the ISA.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for that Answer. As the House knows, the demand for critical minerals is growing fast. They are needed because of their place in modern technology, on which our current and future lives depend. The International Seabed Authority has been trying to develop governance for the use of international seabed mining. The problem, as my noble friend has alluded to, is that the President of the United States has issued an executive order that allows the United States to develop what he has called “the next goldrush”. Do the United Kingdom Government continue to support the International Seabed Authority? If there is to be seabed mining, will they use their best endeavours to ensure that it is done within the framework of the United Nations?

Given that later today we will be discussing the Chagos Islands, I invite my noble friend to reassure the House that the United Kingdom will preserve the right to prohibit deep sea mining around Diego Garcia.

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

My Lords, as a party to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the United Kingdom fully supports the work of the ISA. The UK has been fully engaged in the work of the ISA since it was established, following the entry into force of UNCLOS in 1994. There are strong protections in place against deep sea mining around Diego Garcia. Under the agreement, the United Kingdom has the right to exercise rights and authorities required for the long-term secure and effective operation of the base out to 12 nautical miles and is responsible for environmental protection on Diego Garcia. Additionally, we negotiated a further 12 nautical-mile buffer zone out to 24 nautical miles, in which Mauritius cannot place any maritime installations, sensor structure or artificial island that might be required for subsea mining without UK consent.

Conflict in the Middle East

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Monday 16th June 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

I of course recall many exchanges with the noble Lord in 2015, when we discussed the JCPOA. I also acknowledge the incredibly hard work that my noble friend Lady Ashton put into securing that agreement. However, we are where we are now, and the most important thing is not to look back but to think about what President Trump is determined to do now. Our diplomatic efforts are focused on bringing all our allies—particularly, as the Lord, Lord Ahmad, said, all regional allies—into focus to ensure that we get a deal that ensures compliance with the principles that were originally in that agreement and that we stop Iran obtaining and developing nuclear weapons. That is what we are absolutely determined to ensure does not happen and why we support President Trump.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My noble friend the Minister is absolutely right when he says that this is an incredibly dangerous moment. I declare an interest, as I have very close family members who live in north Tel Aviv and who have spent the last two nights in a bomb shelter. Can my noble friend say more to the House about the conference, sponsored by Saudi Arabia and France, to advance a two-state solution? In what way will the UK Government support it, and will they take part in it?

[Lord Collins of Highbury (Lab)]

As I indicated on Friday, President Macron announced the postponement of the conference—for obvious reasons, not least because many of the participants who would make that conference a success would not be able to get there. However, I reassure my noble friend that, as I have said on previous occasions, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that the conference is a success, that we focus on the importance of the two-state solution and that we look at the means to help deliver that. That is why we will work closely with President Macron and the Saudis to ensure that the conference is reconvened when it is safe to do so. It gives me the opportunity to say again that it will be safe to do so when we can ensure that the situation that we currently face is de-escalated and that people step back.

Parliamentary Commercial Department

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Thursday 12th June 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

Well, I am not quite sure why there is such a delay. The minutes of the meeting that took place this week were approved yesterday, and they will be available this week. I think the noble Lord may have been misinformed, but they are available as they have been approved. We have changed the process because they used not to appear until the next meeting, which is unacceptable, so in recent times they have been made available online ASAP. I shall check, but the noble Lord can find them on his computer, on the intranet. The minutes will appear later on, but the decisions are available as a matter of course and, if he does not get them, he should come and tell me and I shall make sure that he does.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, may I raise one issue that is not about the door? In the joint workings that my noble friend will be taking part in, will she try to develop what I might call the spirit of comity before the two Houses? The nature, membership and workload of both Houses is different; nevertheless, we represent Parliament as a whole. Some of the other issues raised in these exchanges show that we need a better working relationship with each other. I hope, as I said, that in the spirit of comity my noble friend will be able to achieve that.

NATO and European Political Community Meetings

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd July 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

I do not have full details of all the programmes yet; we will try to update the House as we go on. However, work will be around the issues that drive those people to leave their countries. There will be some work on climate change, which we have spoken about, but also on issues such as trying to ensure that people have a future in their own country—for example, on provision of skills and education. Just look at how bad girls’ education in particular is around the world—I pay tribute to the work Gordon Brown has done on this. Those are the kinds of issues that force people to try to seek a better life somewhere else. There has to be hope in their own countries for them as well. The kinds of projects that we will be working with are around access to clean water and to a decent standard of living. We will update the House as more information becomes available.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I welcome my noble friend to her position as Leader of the House. I am glad she emphasised the Prime Minister’s comments about President Biden. When he leaves the stage on 20 January next year, a very important phase in post-war Anglo-American relationships will in some ways come to an end.

I want to ask a question arising out of this Statement, which refers to the resetting of relations with Europe. As has been pointed out, the EPC meetings provide the opportunity for informal discussions. Can the Leader of the House give any encouragement to those of us who hope that discussions will now be able to take place on a youth mobility scheme or, as the Minister of Science said yesterday in this House, the greater movement of scientists between the US and Europe, and, if I can add this, musicians, especially youth musicians?

[Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)]

It is early days to give my noble friend some of the assurances that he is looking for. At this stage, we are looking to establish those relationships and get structures in place to see what outcomes we can produce going forward. The kind of co-operation we want is an EPC that, from all those countries, wider than the EU—which I think part of his question relates to—ensures that we can have co-operation across a range of issues, which will benefit all those involved.

Action Against Houthi Maritime Attacks

Viscount Stansgate Excerpts

Wednesday 24th January 2024 Lords Chamber

[Lord West of Spithead (Lab)]

My Lords—

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords—

[The Earl of Courtown (Con)]

My Lords, it is the turn of the Cross Benches.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord True (Con)]

My Lords, in these strikes we have been very careful to take those matters into consideration. That the strikes took place at night also minimised the risk of civilian activity in these areas.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, the House understands why the military action has taken place and the Prime Minister reported that it has had some degrading effect on the Houthi attacks. However, it is the nature of this situation that it is unlikely to be immediately successful and that this could escalate.

I have two brief questions for the Leader of the House. First, at what stage might the Government decide that it would be beneficial to consult Parliament, with debates and votes on what should occur in the future? Secondly, when it comes to diplomacy, a great deal of the sea traffic that is being adversely affected by the current situation comes from the Far East, especially China, and surely in diplomatic terms there is a case—perhaps it is happening—for China to be brought into play to exercise and bring to bear some pressure on, for example, Iran. Are there moves to this effect going on?

[Lord True (Con)]

My Lords, there is an enormous weight of diplomatic activity going on. It is important to note that China backed the UN resolution which called for this activity to stop and to enable lawful traffic on the seas to go ahead. As far as the accountability of Parliament is concerned, I have spoken about it. We also have a Question on the matter from the noble Baroness, Lady Chakrabarti, tomorrow, which may provide a further opportunity.

The Government are conscious of their duty and of their duty to protect servicepeople who may be sent into hazardous operations. There is also a balance there as to the time and nature of information that can be disclosed.