Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
These initiatives were driven by Lord Stone of Blackheath, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.
Lord Stone of Blackheath has not introduced any legislation before Parliament
Lord Stone of Blackheath has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting
Ofgem are responsible for enforcing supplier licence conditions. Tenants should take a meter reading as soon as they move into a property. Customers will not be responsible for energy bills with incorrect meter readings and can request a new bill from their supplier if they have been billed incorrectly.
Residential tenants are responsible for paying energy bills from the start date of their tenancy only. For non-domestic tenants, Ofgem's recent non-domestic market review found some issues with changing of tenancies, including debt repayment issues from previous tenants. The Retail Energy Code Company is working on new rules in this area.
Ofgem has guidance for tenants, setting out their energy rights, and includes rules regarding the resale of energy to third parties, such as tenants. Landlords, being the property owners, are the legal parties in contracts with energy suppliers. The Department's energy policy does not regulate landlords.
The River Thames Scheme is currently carrying out Statutory consultation on its proposals. The consultation has included public events in Shepperton, Walton and Sunbury where over 1,000 people attended and spoke with members of the project team.
The proposals include building a new channel that will significantly reduce the risk of flooding between Staines and Shepperton. The scheme also includes proposals to increase the capacity of the weirs on the Thames at Teddington, Molesey and Sunbury along with lowering the bed of the Thames near Walton. The weir capacity is being increased as much as possible and this will achieve some reduction in risk downstream of Shepperton along the Thames. The level of risk reduction is different in each location.
The level of flood risk reduction that will be achieved is available for everyone to see as part of the consultation. The results are set out in detail in the Modelling report for the scheme which can be found at: RTS Modelling non-technical summary (see attached).
The Jubilee Flood Relief Channel is part of the Maidenhead Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme (MWEFAS) that reduces the risk of flooding to approximately 3,000 properties in Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton. The Jubilee Flood Relief Channel always has some water flowing through it. In flood conditions, we split some of the water away from the River Thames through the Jubilee. The Jubilee provides extra space for this water before it rejoins the River Thames at Datchet. It is not designed to reduce flood risk to communities upstream or downstream of the scheme. It does not adversely impact communities downstream. We operate weir gates at Taplow to control the amount of water being split into the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel. As the flow in the River Thames increases, we open the gates gradually in small increments to allow water to flow through the channel.
The Environment Agency reviews the performance of their Flood and Coastal Risk Management assets to ensure they continue to perform as designed to protect homes and communities. Following flooding in 2003, river modelling was completed to re-examine any impacts from the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel on downstream communities. The results showed that there would be very little difference in the flows at Windsor, and the downstream water levels, with and without the Jubilee Flood Relief Channel being operated.
In February 2014 over 1000+ properties flooded internally across the Thames area, with the greatest numbers of these of these in the Lower Thames in Berkshire and Surrey. The flooding was very prolonged and lasted from February 2014 through to March, with many communities impacted along the Thames, such as at Datchet, Wraysbury, Egham, Chertsey, Staines and communities further downstream through Surrey. There were no reported properties flooded internally in Windsor in 2014.
In January 2024, Storm Henk resulted in heavy and widespread rainfall falling on saturated ground in a short space of time. There had been flooding in some local areas in December 2023 primarily affecting tributaries of the River Thames. The total volume of flow which passed down the Jubilee flood relief channel appears similar to 2014. The Environment Agency is currently receiving and collating reports on the number of properties that may have been impacted. Current information indicates around 300 properties may have flooded internally across the Thames Area.
Following a significant flood incident, the Environment Agency reviews all areas of incident response including partnership working to understand impacts and actions to better prepare for future events. We are currently undertaking this following the January 2024 flooding.
Our Environment Agency online portal Citizen Space holds a suite of useful information relating to the Jubilee River including videos and fact sheets and can be located under Maidenhead Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme.
The Jubilee flood relief channel, forms part of the ‘Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme’ that reduces the risk of flooding to 3,200 properties in Maidenhead, Windsor, Eton and Cookham. Published details on the Jubilee River flood alleviation scheme are available on - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).
The flood relief channel is not designed to store or hold flood water. It provides additional capacity for water that would have flowed through and flooded communities in Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton, taking it a different route via the Jubilee flood relief channel, before returning it back into the Thames upstream of Datchet.
Flood modelling for the Maidenhead, Windsor and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme prior to its construction showed that the scheme would not increase flood risk for others.
After flooding in 2003, independent river modelling was completed to re-examine any impacts from the Jubilee flood relief channel on downstream communities. The results showed that there is very little difference made to water flows at Windsor compared to levels downstream when the channel is operated. The executive summary of the independent modelling was carried out and described in ‘Mechanisms of Flooding’ [attached].
The Environment Agency and other Risk Management Authorities are delivering a programme of flood alleviation measures on the River Thames and its tributaries which are at different stages of consenting and approvals. This includes a major flood alleviation scheme at Oxford, the River Thames Scheme between Egham and Teddington, the Thames Valley Flood Scheme and the Datchet to Hythe End Flood Improvement Measures project, alongside a range of smaller projects. Subject to approvals, these schemes will reduce flood risk and provide wider benefits to tens of thousands of homes and businesses.
In addition to this, the Environment Agency operates its existing assets and carries out river maintenance to ensure the Thames and its tributaries flow effectively. During Storm Henk, these existing measures protected approximately 11,000 properties from flooding throughout the Thames Valley. The Environment Agency and partners regularly engage with communities along the Thames to support and advise them on measures they can take to prepare for and improve their resilience to flooding.
The River Thames Scheme has assessed the impact of increasing the capacity of the weirs on the lower part of the Thames, including at Sunbury. Increasing the capacity of the weir will reduce flood risk in the Sunbury Reach and the capacity will be increased as part of the River Thames Scheme.
The River Thames Scheme will reduce flood risk by creating a flood alleviation channel in two sections, increasing the capacity of three weirs at Sunbury, Molesey and Teddington, and channel deepening on the Thames near Walton. Widespread dredging was considered as one of the options during the appraisal phase of the scheme, but it was found to only have a very modest reduction in flood risk and was not an economically viable option.
Mental health support is available to anyone in England experiencing mental ill health including as a result of these past events.
Prior COVID-19 infection is not included as an appropriate exemption from the vaccination regulations. However, following the continued success of the vaccination programme, the Government announced on 31 January 2022 that vaccination will no longer be a condition of deployment for health and social care staff, subject to a public consultation and parliamentary approval.
The Department is closely monitoring the evidence on the case for using ivermectin for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. Licensing of ivermectin is dependent on application to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency for authorisation. We are continuing to monitor for new data from trials worldwide, including the UK PRINCIPLE clinical trial platform, which announced on 23 June that ivermectin would be investigated to generate robust data on its effectiveness in treating adults aged 18 years old and over who are at higher risk of serious illness from COVID-19.
The UK's longstanding position is that determining whether a situation amounts to genocide is an issue for competent national and international courts after consideration of all of the available evidence, rather than a decision by Governments or non-judicial parties. For this reason, the UK has not made an assessment of this case.
Any decision to recognise a Palestinian state will rest on an assessment of the prospects for peace, and what best supports progress towards a two-state solution. Bilateral recognition in itself cannot end the occupation. Without a negotiated settlement the occupation and the problems that come with it will continue. The UK priority is working with the parties and other international actors to encourage a durable ceasefire and to urge them to address the drivers of conflict.
The UK will recognise a Palestinian state at a time when it best serves the objective of peace. Bilateral recognition in itself cannot end the occupation. Without a negotiated settlement the occupation and the problems that come with it will continue. We continue to work closely with international partners to strongly advocate for a two-state solution and encourage a return to meaningful negotiations between both parties.
The UK continues to urge all parties involved in the dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam - Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan - to come to an agreement on the filling and operation of the dam. We support the efforts by the African Union (AU) to help find agreement, and ensure that water resources are managed in a way that ensures their long-term sustainable use for all parties.
The UK continues to urge all parties involved in the dispute over the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam - Ethiopia, Egypt and Sudan - to come to an agreement on the filling and operation of the dam. We support the efforts by the African Union (AU) to help find agreement, and ensure that water resources are managed in a way that ensures their long-term sustainable use for all parties. We continue to speak to all three Governments through our Embassies in those countries, and regularly engage the US and EU as observers to the AU-led process, including through the UK Special Envoy for the Red Sea and the Horn of Africa. The Minister for Africa also raised the issue with the Ethiopian Ambassador on 24 February.
A bill of exchange is a paper financial instrument that is used to transfer money from one person to another instead of the transfer of the actual money itself. The Bills of Exchange Act 1882 does not specify how they must pay if one is agreed.
As technology and consumer behaviour changes, it should remain the choice of individual organisations as to whether to accept or decline any form of payment, including cash or card, based on their consideration of factors such as customer preference and cost.
Nonetheless, the Government recognises that many people continue to transact in cash across the UK. The Government is currently taking legislation to protect access to cash across the UK through Parliament as part of the Financial Services and Markets Bill 2022. The legislation will establish the Financial Conduct Authority as the lead regulator for access to cash with responsibility and powers to seek to ensure reasonable provision of withdrawal and deposit facilities. This legislation will support local businesses to continue accepting cash by ensuring they have reasonable access to deposit facilities.
Further details about the Financial Services and Markets Bill can be found on the Parliament website.
As technology and consumer behaviour changes, it should remain the choice of individual organisations as to whether to accept or decline any form of payment, including cash or card, based on their consideration of factors such as customer preference and cost.
Nonetheless, the Government recognises that many people continue to transact in cash across the UK and engages closely with financial regulators to monitor and assess trends relating to cash. Research undertaken by the Financial Conduct Authority found that 98% of small businesses would never turn away a customer if they needed to pay by cash.
The Government has introduced legislation to protect access to cash across the UK to Parliament as part of the Financial Services and Markets Bill 2022. The legislation will establish the Financial Conduct Authority as the lead regulator for access to cash with responsibility and powers to ensure that people can continue to access cash withdrawal and deposit facilities. This legislation will support local businesses to continue accepting cash by ensuring they have reasonable access to deposit facilities.
Further details about the Financial Services and Markets Bill can be found on the Parliament website.
Whilst we keep all policies under review, there are no plans to change the existing policy, which allows asylum seekers with pending claims to work after 12 months, restricted to jobs on the Shortage Occupation List. Our policy position distinguishes between those who need protection and those seeking to work here who should instead apply for a work visa under the Immigration Rules. Individuals in need of protection should not make perilous journeys in order to seek employment in the United Kingdom, instead they should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach.
There are also various legal routes for those seeking to work in the UK under the Points-Based System. These routes include Skilled Worker, Global Talent, and Health and Care routes, which are supporting UK businesses to recruit workers with the skills and talent they need from around the world.
There are no plans to change the existing policy, which allows asylum seekers to work if their claim has been outstanding for 12 months or more, through no fault of their own. It is important that our approach distinguishes between those who need protection and those seeking to work here who should apply for a work visa under the Immigration Rules. Asylum seekers do not need to make perilous journeys in order to seek employment in the United Kingdom, and we are concerned such a change could be a further pull factor.
The Home Office has a legal obligation, as set out in the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, to support asylum seekers (including any dependants) who would otherwise be destitute. This may include the provision of accommodation and/or subsistence support.
The level of the allowance given to those supported under 1999 Act is reviewed each year to ensure it covers asylum seekers’ essential living needs.
In 2020, the Justice Select Committee (JSC) undertook a review of private prosecutions and provided nine recommendations.
The Government agreed to two of these recommendations:
Private Prosecution Register
In the Government’s response to the JSC report, we agreed that a central register of private prosecutions would be introduced to include the names of the prosecutor and defendant, the offence in question, and whether the summons application was granted. This register was introduced by HMCTS in late 2021.
The register is not publicly accessible, and it was neither a recommendation made by the JSC report nor an undertaking agreed by the Government for it to be. The register contains personal data including where people have been accused of crimes where the court found there were no grounds to commence a prosecution. The register is a court record and there are no grounds provided under rules of court, the Data Protection Act 2018 or the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for these personal details to be released to the public.
Requests for non-personal information from the register are accessible through a Freedom of Information request to HMCTS.
Cost of Private Prosecutions
The Government has committed to bringing forward legislation to ensure costs recoverable from central funds by a private prosecutor are limited in the same way as costs recoverable by an acquitted defendant and will enact this when parliamentary time allows.
The assessment of claims and payment of prosecutors’ costs out of central funds for cases brought in the magistrates’ court and Crown Court is undertaken by the Legal Aid Agency’s (LAA) Criminal Cases Unit (CCU) unless the court summarily assesses the claim under s.17(2B) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. Information about central funds expenditure, including private prosecutions, is published on a quarterly basis within the LAA’s official statistics. A copy of the relevant data is attached at Annex A.
Other Recommendations
Sir Wyn Williams’ Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry is examining, in detail, the failings that led to the Post Office scandal. It is possible that this will provide insight on the extent to which the private prosecution regime played a role in this particular injustice.
The Government is, however, examining the wider question of private prosecutions and is therefore committed to looking again at the Justice Select Committee’s recommendations in their 2020 report as part of this work.
Under s.17 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 the court has the power to order the payment from central funds of such amount as the court considers reasonably sufficient to compensate the prosecutor for any expenses properly incurred by them in the proceedings.
Responsibility of assessing claims and administering payment of criminal claims out of central funds for work done in the magistrates’ court and Crown Court are assessed by the Legal Aid Agency’s (LAA) Criminal Cases Unit (CCU) unless the court summarily assesses the claim under s.17(2B) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985.
Information about central funds expenditure, including private prosecutions, is published on a quarterly basis within the LAA’s official statistics. The statistics provide useful management information to inform policy and legislative changes. A copy of the relevant data is attached.
The Justice Select Committee (JSC) considered safeguards in private prosecutions in 2021. They found that private prosecutions are rigorously tested, and weak ones filtered out. The Government agrees that, in most cases, existing safeguards work to prevent private prosecutions being misused.
In accordance with recommendations set out in the JSC report a private prosecutions register has been established for the magistrates’ courts in England and Wales. This enables the court or an authorised legal adviser, deciding whether to issue a summons to commence proceedings, to identify whether an application has already been determined or has been made by a vexatious litigant so that it can, where appropriate, be refused expeditiously.
The Criminal Procedure Rules have been amended so that they list the circumstances in which magistrates’ courts may refuse to issue a summons. The rules now also require summonses that are issued on the application of a private prosecutor to identify the prosecutor. This is intended to make it easier for defendants to refer their case to the Director of Public Prosecutions to consider taking over the case under s.6(2) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985.
As set out in its response to the JSC report, the Government is committed to introducing legislation to limit the amount of costs a private prosecutor can recover from central funds, mirroring the arrangements already in place for private paying defendants, where recoverable costs are capped at legal aid rates.