1-20 of 1,582 results for house:"House of Lords"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.399 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.009 seconds
- Search query
- house:"House of Lords"
- We searched for
- legislature_ses:25277
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
More
Subject
More
Publisher
My Lords, on housing insurability, what consideration is being given to the problem of premium escalation and refusal to insure in areas that have not flooded but are shown as at risk on flooding mapping due to climate change? Would it not be helpful if we could have some review on how local authorities disseminate such information, its effect on premiums and how it is used during property conveyance? I declare an interest as a resident of an apartment where flood protection measures have enabled us to avoid the increased premiums I am referring to in this question.
My Lords, on housing insurability, what consideration is being given to the problem of premium escalation and refusal to insure in areas that have not flooded but are shown as at risk on flooding mapping due to climate change? Would it not be helpful if we could have some review on how local authorities disseminate such information, its effect on premiums and how it is used during property conveyance? I declare an interest as a resident of an apartment where flood protection measures have enabled us to avoid the increased premiums I am referring to in this question.
As I said, the Climate Change Committee has assessed that the insurance gap is currently low relative to most countries. Flood risk, though, is the most immediate concern for UK households. The Environment Agency’s latest flood
risk assessment indicated that around 6.3 million properties in England are at risk of flooding, increasing to 8 million as a result of climate change. The Government are working with Flood Re to ensure the scheme remains effective and financially sustainable through to its planned end date of 2039, and discussions are ongoing to understand and tackle the medium-term pressures.
My Lords, while we all will welcome this year’s very significant increase in funding, which greatly helps the viability of small chemists, we have a real problem in Cumbria, with its small towns, rural communities and limited chemist availability. Could we go further where the result of non-viability is problems in primary healthcare? Could we allow the remaining chemists greater flexibility and discretion in making changes to the strength, quantity and formulation in prescriptions? This could help to relieve the impact on primary healthcare services.
My Lords, while we all will welcome this year’s very significant increase in funding, which greatly helps the viability of small chemists, we have a real problem in Cumbria, with its small towns, rural communities and limited chemist availability. Could we go further where the result of non-viability is problems in primary healthcare? Could we allow the remaining chemists greater flexibility and discretion in making changes to the strength, quantity and formulation in prescriptions? This could help to relieve the impact on primary healthcare services.
My noble friend is quite right to identify the very important role that pharmacies play in the move from hospital to community. That is why we are funding the rollout of, for example, independent prescribing from autumn this year. That will build on the success of Pharmacy First and the pharmacy contraceptive service, and provide much more local, on-the-spot care for common conditions. In rural areas, dispensing doctors can dispense medicines to patients who live more than a mile from a pharmacy. Also, online pharmacies can deliver medicines free of charge.
My Lords, I return to my previous contributions on building housing on land acquired at agricultural prices, which is of particular benefit to young buyers. Can we look at developments in Hammarby in Sweden and Nijmegen in Holland, where there have been major housing developments in both locations on land acquired at reduced cost? All I ask is that we look at these precedents and consider whether, with a review of land title on housing sold on such land, we could similarly build in the United Kingdom and help young buyers.
My Lords, I return to my previous contributions on building housing on land acquired at agricultural prices, which is of particular benefit to young buyers. Can we look at developments in Hammarby in Sweden and Nijmegen in Holland, where there have been major housing developments in both locations on land acquired at reduced cost? All I ask is that we look at these precedents and consider whether, with a review of land title on housing sold on such land, we could similarly build in the United Kingdom and help young buyers.
I am always happy to look at any innovative ideas, wherever they occur. If there are those in Europe, I am happy to have a further look at them. We are making sure that we work harder on land availability through our partners in this programme. Some young people are currently paying far more in rent than they would have to pay if they had a mortgage. So making sure that finance is accessible and that properties are accessible is very important to getting this moving.
My Lords, with land plots for housing often exceeding the cost of home construction, does that factor alone not act as a real disincentive to the development of housing for sale at realistic, affordable prices? Why do we not establish a study into the relationship between land pricing and housing development costs? The study could consider proposals for building on land acquired at agricultural prices and sold under new forms of
housing registration and land title arrangements, but which, at the same time, with other measures, could protect investment in existing freehold.
My Lords, with land plots for housing often exceeding the cost of home construction, does that factor alone not act as a real disincentive to the development of housing for sale at realistic, affordable prices? Why do we not establish a study into the relationship between land pricing and housing development costs? The study could consider proposals for building on land acquired at agricultural prices and sold under new forms of
housing registration and land title arrangements, but which, at the same time, with other measures, could protect investment in existing freehold.
I thank my noble friend. We continually look at issues around the viability of building and are working very closely, with both the development sector and our local authorities, to make sure that land pricing and other issues around viability are taken into account. The £39 billion we have put into social and affordable housing will make sure that we can give some support to those who are trying desperately to get some social housing built in the country; we continue to work with them on that. The bold planning reforms we have introduced will also assist with that process.
With the jobs market hugely influenced by the availability of training, in particular apprenticeship training, should we not positively welcome the £820 million for the youth guarantee scheme, with its emphasis on quality? Is not the lesson that the Government have learned from the YOPs and community programmes of the 1980s that such schemes work only when they incorporate quality, real skills development, and the prospect of long-term employment? Are they not the hallmark of this much expanded and brilliant training programme?
With the jobs market hugely influenced by the availability of training, in particular apprenticeship training, should we not positively welcome the £820 million for the youth guarantee scheme, with its emphasis on quality? Is not the lesson that the Government have learned from the YOPs and community programmes of the 1980s that such schemes work only when they incorporate quality, real skills development, and the prospect of long-term employment? Are they not the hallmark of this much expanded and brilliant training programme?
I welcome a particularly fine question from my noble friend. I could almost have said that myself; in fact, maybe I will. He makes a really important point. We need to have support in the investment of skills for young people: skills for today and for tomorrow. Simply putting them on to some kind of make-job scheme does not work. We actually need to invest in them, so my noble friend is quite right. At the Budget, we announced £820 million of investment into the youth guarantee to support young people to earn or learn, but there was another £725 million for the growth and skills levy. We are trying to invest in young people so that they will find ways of getting the skills and be inspired to get out there and make a difference.
We also need to understand those who are not engaging. Alan Milburn issued a call for evidence this week. He is asking two questions: what is stopping more young people participating in employment, education or training, and what would make the biggest difference to support more young people to participate? We want to hear from anyone with knowledge, expertise or lived experience, so I urge noble Lords, with all their connections: let us all together try to get the answer to one of the most pressing questions facing our country.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they are holding with the government of the United States of America on measures to de-escalate the conflict in Ukraine.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what discussions they are holding with the government of the United States of America on measures to de-escalate the conflict in Ukraine.
My Lords, the UK fully supports President Trump’s efforts to end Russia’s illegal war, and we remain in regular contact with the US at every level. Last week, G7 Foreign Ministers agreed on the need for an immediate ceasefire and that the current line of contact should be the starting point for negotiations. We continue to work with the US and international partners to ratchet up the pressure on Putin, to force him to engage in meaningful discussions that result in just and lasting peace.
My Lords, for over three years I have argued in the House for delaying Ukraine NATO membership, non-nuclear weapon status for barrier states stretching from Estonia to Georgia, a major powers treaty on Ukraine neutrality and the Russian ask, a deal on Donetsk and Luhansk. Why not think out of the box, face reality on the ground, join Trump’s meaningful attempts in promoting a Russian transition from quasi-autocracy to democracy and, in doing so, derail an opportunist, nomadic Russia’s links with an increasing assertive China, all in favour of promoting post-Putin Russia’s links to the West, which is where it belongs?
My Lords, for over three years I have argued in the House for delaying Ukraine NATO membership, non-nuclear weapon status for barrier states stretching from Estonia to Georgia, a major powers treaty on Ukraine neutrality and the Russian ask, a deal on Donetsk and Luhansk. Why not think out of the box, face reality on the ground, join Trump’s meaningful attempts in promoting a Russian transition from quasi-autocracy to democracy and, in doing so, derail an opportunist, nomadic Russia’s links with an increasing assertive China, all in favour of promoting post-Putin Russia’s links to the West, which is where it belongs?
I do not think the House is with the noble Lord on his plan. He has an idea for a settlement that he has long held close to his heart and put to this Chamber on several occasions. He knows that we disagree fundamentally with one another on this issue. We believe it is for the Ukrainians to decide when the conditions are right, whether they are prepared to negotiate and on what basis. That will remain this Government’s position.
My Lords, does Westminster City Council in particular need additional support when a band H house worth £60 million in the borough carries a council tax of £2,100 a year, while a similar band H house worth £300,000 in Cumbria, in my former constituency, carries a tax of £4,600 a year—double Westminster’s? Worse, how can a band C local authority house in Cumbria’s Keswick pay more in council tax than that same £60 million-worth house in Mayfair? The system is discredited. We need new higher tax bandings and a fairer distribution of the burden.
My Lords, does Westminster City Council in particular need additional support when a band H house worth £60 million in the borough carries a council tax of £2,100 a year, while a similar band H house worth £300,000 in Cumbria, in my former constituency, carries a tax of £4,600 a year—double Westminster’s? Worse, how can a band C local authority house in Cumbria’s Keswick pay more in council tax than that same £60 million-worth house in Mayfair? The system is discredited. We need new higher tax bandings and a fairer distribution of the burden.
My noble friend has illustrated why we are setting about this fair funding review. It is for local authorities to decide at what rate they set their council tax. Of course, it has to reflect the service needs of each area, taking account of other sources of income and historic council tax decisions made over the decades. We want to make sure that we make this a fair funding review, which is why we have been consulting on it and looking at the formulas to make sure that they operate effectively. I am sure my noble friend would not expect me to comment on the new higher council tax bands in advance of the Chancellor’s next fiscal event—
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Hanson of Flint on 15 September (HL9952, HL9953, HL9954, HL9955, HL9956), whether they will answer the questions put.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Hanson of Flint on 15 September (HL9952, HL9953, HL9954, HL9955, HL9956), whether they will answer the questions put.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations. This can include consideration of how other countries provide support for people seeking asylum.
My Lords, surely if we really want to reduce undocumented migrant movement pull factors, we should stop the emphasis on the resolution of conflict through costly military interventions that provoke worldwide population movements and plunder our development aid budgets. Is not the answer, in part, to more greatly resource third-world development, with measures to de-escalate conflict and—the holy grail—to re-examine the world’s commitment to the principle of prohibited intervention in failing states, as defined by the ICJ?
My Lords, surely if we really want to reduce undocumented migrant movement pull factors, we should stop the emphasis on the resolution of conflict through costly military interventions that provoke worldwide population movements and plunder our development aid budgets. Is not the answer, in part, to more greatly resource third-world development, with measures to de-escalate conflict and—the holy grail—to re-examine the world’s commitment to the principle of prohibited intervention in failing states, as defined by the ICJ?
I will share part of my noble friend’s analysis, in that factors of war, poverty and starvation are driving migration from many parts of the world into western Europe. He will know that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, and other European countries and international partners, are looking at what those driving factors are. Part of the overall strategy needs to be how we deal with
poverty, hunger, starvation and the impact of war. There are times when the UK and other partners need to help and support interventions, but I take the first part of my noble friend’s question extremely seriously, and that is something our international partners are very focused on.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for housing and accommodation for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for housing and accommodation for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the daily subsistence allowances for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the daily subsistence allowances for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for health services, including dental care, for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for health services, including dental care, for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for child support services for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for child support services for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for transport for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to compare the level of support for transport for people seeking asylum provided by EU member states, Norway and Switzerland.
The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be destitute. Asylum Support provisions are reviewed regularly to ensure that we remain compliant in meeting our legal obligations.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 4 July (HL8754), what was the breakdown of costs mentioned in the Answer for 2023–24 between products related to (1) colostomy, and (2) ileostomy.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 4 July (HL8754), what was the breakdown of costs mentioned in the Answer for 2023–24 between products related to (1) colostomy, and (2) ileostomy.
Further to the previous answer of 4 July 2025 to Question HL8754, the breakdown of the total Net Ingredient Cost (NIC) figure is as follows:
- for colostomy, in 2023/24, there were a total of 491,601 items dispensed to patients in the community in England where the item prescribed was clearly named as a colostomy appliance for which no National Health Service charges were collected at the point of dispensing, with a total NIC of £110,834,133.28; and
- for ileostomy, in 2023/24, there were a total of 808,049 items dispensed to patients in the community in England where the item prescribed was clearly named as an ileostomy appliance for which no NHS charges were collected at the point of dispensing, with a total NIC of £128,445,887.47.
These figures exclude a large number of other stoma appliances that could not be clearly identified as colostomy or ileostomy from their name, although some of these other appliances will be used as colostomy or ileostomy appliances.
The NIC is the basic price of a product excluding VAT. It does not take account of discounts, dispensing costs, fees and allowances paid to pharmacists and appliance contractors for the service they provide to the NHS, or prescription charge income received, where the single charge or Prescription Prepayment Certificate fee is paid, or foregone, where prescriptions are dispensed free of charge.
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the total cost of providing free prescriptions of colostomy and ileostomy related products in 2023–24.
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the total cost of providing free prescriptions of colostomy and ileostomy related products in 2023–24.
It is not possible to estimate the total cost to the National Health Service of providing free prescriptions for colostomy and ileostomy related products. NHS patients pay a fixed charge for each prescription item dispensed in primary care, unless they are exempt from prescription charges or hold a valid pre-payment certificate (PPC).
In 2023/24, there was a total of 1,299,650 items with a total Net Ingredient Cost (NIC) of £239,280,020 dispensed to patients in the community in England, where the item prescribed was clearly named as colostomy or ileostomy appliances, for which no NHS charges were collected at the point of dispensing. This total includes items where no charge was collected due to a patient holding a valid PPC. This total excludes a large number of other stoma appliances that could not be clearly identified as colostomy or ileostomy from their name, although some of these other appliances will be used as colostomy or ileostomy appliances. The NIC is the basic price of a product excluding VAT. It does not take account of discounts, dispensing costs, fees, or allowances paid to pharmacists and appliance contractors for the services they provide to the NHS, or prescription charge income received, where the single charge or PPC fee is paid, or foregone where prescriptions are dispensed free of charge.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 4 June (HL7632), whether breaching a deportation order constitutes a specific criminal offence; and if so, on what basis the provision of information on the number of such breaches meets the criterion for disproportionate costs.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 4 June (HL7632), whether breaching a deportation order constitutes a specific criminal offence; and if so, on what basis the provision of information on the number of such breaches meets the criterion for disproportionate costs.
It is a criminal offence under section 24(A1) of the Immigration Act 1971 to knowingly enter the United Kingdom in breach of a deportation order. The offence attracts a maximum sentence of 5 years’ imprisonment.
When assessing breaches of the disproportionate cost threshold, consideration is given to the volume of case records that would need to be reviewed and the time it would take to review those cases which is calculated at a flat rate of £25 per hour.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 4 June (HL7632), how many people who have been deported from the United Kingdom after (1) asylum application refusal, or (2) completion of a prison sentence, have returned to the UK (a) as illegal...
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 4 June (HL7632), how many people who have been deported from the United Kingdom after (1) asylum application refusal, or (2) completion of a prison sentence, have returned to the UK (a) as illegal...
The requested data is not currently available from published statistics, and the relevant data could only be collated and verified for the purpose of answering this question at disproportionate cost.
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence they have on the incidence of sham marriages in the United Kingdom.
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence they have on the incidence of sham marriages in the United Kingdom.
The Government takes abuse of the spouse and partner immigration routes very seriously and is clear that family migration must be based on a genuine and subsisting marriage or relationship. The marriage referral and investigation scheme (the Scheme), introduced across the UK under the Immigration Act 2014, requires that all proposed marriages and civil partnerships where one or both parties could gain an immigration advantage from it are referred to the Home Office.
Under the Scheme, where we have reasonable grounds to suspect a sham relationship, the marriage notice period will be extended to allow for further investigation, and for enforcement or casework action to be taken where appropriate.