1-20 of 301 results for askedby:"Lord Harries of Pentregarth"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.29 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.005 seconds
- Search query
- askedby:"Lord Harries of Pentregarth"
- We searched for
- tablingMember_ses:301073 OR askingMember_ses:301073
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
I thank the Minister for her reply, and I appreciate that the Government have made a real attempt to balance protecting Muslims on the one hand and safeguarding freedom of speech on the other. While I can see that the definition might be quite useful from a cultural point of view, it is very difficult to see how it is going to work in relation to the law. The Government’s statement specifically says:
“The definition does not change what is or is not a crime, nor does it equate anti-Muslim hostility with crime”.
My question is really this: in what way, if any, does this definition make a difference to the application of the law? After all, violence against Muslims is already a crime. By having this definition, what difference does it make?
I thank the Minister for her reply, and I appreciate that the Government have made a real attempt to balance protecting Muslims on the one hand and safeguarding freedom of speech on the other. While I can see that the definition might be quite useful from a cultural point of view, it is very difficult to see how it is going to work in relation to the law. The Government’s statement specifically says:
“The definition does not change what is or is not a crime, nor does it equate anti-Muslim hostility with crime”.
My question is really this: in what way, if any, does this definition make a difference to the application of the law? After all, violence against Muslims is already a crime. By having this definition, what difference does it make?
The noble and right reverend Lord is quite correct to say that this definition does not change the law. However, it describes distinct forms of unacceptable hostility that many Muslims experience. We know the terrible things that happen, online and in person, to members of our Muslim community. This should increase understanding across wider society. It gives victims confidence that what they face will be recognised and taken seriously. By setting clearer boundaries around what is and, importantly, what is not anti-Muslim hostility, the definition helps create space for a much more open and honest discussion of sensitive—we know how sensitive these issues are—but wholly legitimate issues. The definition does not restrict criticism, debate or even ridiculing. It is about unacceptable behaviour towards people, not the protection of belief systems.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of how the new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility will (1) protect Muslims, and (2) safeguard freedom of speech.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of how the new non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility will (1) protect Muslims, and (2) safeguard freedom of speech.
My Lords, the Government have adopted a definition of anti-Muslim hostility focused on protecting individuals. The definition provides a shared practical framework to help victims, communities and services respond to anti-Muslim hostility while improving understanding across wider society. It also explicitly safeguards free speech, making it clear that criticism, debate or even ridicule of religious ideas remain lawful. Keeping citizens safe is a fundamental duty of government. I would always hope that we did not need these definitions, but we know we do, and this definition is a crucial step in strengthening the protection for our citizens.
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with governments of other countries regarding abolishing capital punishment.
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with governments of other countries regarding abolishing capital punishment.
I refer the Noble Lord to the answer provided in the House of Commons on 16 September in response to Question 71565, which - for ease of reference - is reproduced below:
The UK Government is opposed to the death penalty, in all circumstances, as a matter of principle. We believe that the death penalty's use undermines human dignity, that there is no conclusive evidence of its deterrent value, and that any miscarriage of justice leading to its imposition is irreversible and irreparable.
The UK works with our international partners and with NGOs to: increase the number of abolitionist countries, or countries with a moratorium on the use of the death penalty; reduce the numbers of executions and restrict the use of the death penalty in retentionist countries; increase judicial capacity and legal reform through training and partnerships with UK legal expertise, and encourage greater transparency about the use of the death penalty in line with international standards.
The UK remains a strong supporter of the UN General Assembly Resolution for the moratorium on the use of the death penalty.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the post opening project evaluations of smart motorways in relation to (1) safety, and (2) value for money.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the post opening project evaluations of smart motorways in relation to (1) safety, and (2) value for money.
My Lords, I thank the noble and right reverend Lord, Lord Harries of Pentregarth, for his Question. I assure him that safety is our top priority. While National Highways reports show that smart motorways are meeting or exceeding safety objectives in all but one upgrade, we know that people need to feel safe as well as be safe. That is why National Highways invested some £900 million to improve safety and educate drivers. The reports show that these upgrades have added vital capacity to some of the country’s busiest roads and are largely on course to meet their environmental goals.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reply, but according to National Highways’ official reports, these big projects to convert hard shoulders on the M1, M4, M6 and M25 were regarded as poor, or very poor, value. I wonder whether the Government agree with that assessment. My main concern, however, is safety. Although I totally respect the huge improvements made by the technology—the electronic signs that can control traffic and close lanes—it has nevertheless been shown that casualties and serious
injuries have gone up on some stretches of these smart motorways: the M3 and parts of M1, for example. Therefore, what further steps will the Government take to improve safety on these smart motorways?
My Lords, I thank the Minister for her reply, but according to National Highways’ official reports, these big projects to convert hard shoulders on the M1, M4, M6 and M25 were regarded as poor, or very poor, value. I wonder whether the Government agree with that assessment. My main concern, however, is safety. Although I totally respect the huge improvements made by the technology—the electronic signs that can control traffic and close lanes—it has nevertheless been shown that casualties and serious
injuries have gone up on some stretches of these smart motorways: the M3 and parts of M1, for example. Therefore, what further steps will the Government take to improve safety on these smart motorways?
Just to broaden the issue, the majority of schemes are delivering economic benefits and have created additional lane capacity, which is beneficial now and into the future. I think it goes back to the perception issue. Smart motorways remain our safest roads, and we are monitoring the impact of investment in safety, including the 150 emergency areas we have added. I hope that answers some of the noble and right reverend Lord’s questions. Although carrying half the traffic, 327 more people were killed or seriously injured on A-roads compared with motorways. We take road safety seriously, and recently published our new road safety strategy, in which we outline the further measures we are intending to take.
I thank the Minister for her reply. The devastating civil war in South Sudan left 400,000 dead and nearly half the population displaced. The 2018 peace agreement was based on power-sharing between Salva Kiir, largely supported by the Dinka people, and Riek Machar, largely supported by the Nuer. But in November, the president sacked his vice-president and a number of his supporters in the Cabinet. What international pressure has been brought to bear to reinstate the vice-president to his position so that civil war may not break out again?
I thank the Minister for her reply. The devastating civil war in South Sudan left 400,000 dead and nearly half the population displaced. The 2018 peace agreement was based on power-sharing between Salva Kiir, largely supported by the Dinka people, and Riek Machar, largely supported by the Nuer. But in November, the president sacked his vice-president and a number of his supporters in the Cabinet. What international pressure has been brought to bear to reinstate the vice-president to his position so that civil war may not break out again?
The noble and right reverend Lord is completely right when he says that the political instability in South Sudan does not in any way help us achieve the lasting peace we need or the implementation of the power-sharing agreement. But we continue to work closely alongside international partners and with our team in Juba to make sure that any processes there might be around the situation that he identified are done properly. We continue to make the case for stability and the inclusive politics that, in the end, will be the key to a peaceful future for South Sudan.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking with international partners to bring about stable government in South Sudan.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking with international partners to bring about stable government in South Sudan.
My Lords, the United Kingdom is deeply concerned by the deteriorating political and security situation in South Sudan. That is why we, alongside our like-minded international partners, continue to urge for an immediate de-escalation of current tensions and a return to an inclusive political dialogue. The transitional Government of South Sudan must engage with regional efforts towards de-escalation, led by IGAD and the African Union, of which the United Kingdom is in support.
One of the problems at the moment is online images of what it is to be a young man—distorted images that imply that to be a young man is to be misogynistic, carrying with them assumptions of implicit violence. What are the current Government doing online to counteract these false, distorted images of what it is to be a man?
One of the problems at the moment is online images of what it is to be a young man—distorted images that imply that to be a young man is to be misogynistic, carrying with them assumptions of implicit violence. What are the current Government doing online to counteract these false, distorted images of what it is to be a man?
I find it quite upsetting to see some of the images and messages that are put out from people who, in some cases, currently face criminal charges in other countries. It is important that, through the work that my noble friend Lady Smith of Malvern is doing, we work with schools and communities to ensure that young men in particular respect everyone in society, and that they are not taken down some of the very false routes that currently appear on much of social media.
My Lords, the treatment of Professor Ben-Gad was totally disgraceful, as is the rise in antisemitism. Following up the Question from the noble Lord, Lord Leigh, surely the further question is: what disciplinary steps will be taken against universities if they fail to halt this rise of antisemitism on their campuses?
My Lords, the treatment of Professor Ben-Gad was totally disgraceful, as is the rise in antisemitism. Following up the Question from the noble Lord, Lord Leigh, surely the further question is: what disciplinary steps will be taken against universities if they fail to halt this rise of antisemitism on their campuses?
The Office for Students’ new condition E6, which requires universities to take action and have in place the framework to tackle intimidation and harassment, is a route through which the OfS could take action against universities if
they do not take this seriously—though I believe many vice-chancellors are taking this seriously—and ensure that our universities are safe places for both Jewish students and staff.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to limit deforestation internationally, in particular in West Papua.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to limit deforestation internationally, in particular in West Papua.
My Lords, the UK has long been at the forefront of efforts to protect forests and halt and reverse deforestation, and we look forward to a strong focus on forests at the upcoming COP 30 in Brazil. Through our diplomacy partnerships and development programmes, we focus on forest governance, sustainable trade and investment, and mobilising finance to protect and restore forest biomes. We work across the tropics, including in the Indonesian region of Papua. We work closely with the Government of Indonesia to support sustainable development and Indonesia’s green transition.
I thank the Minister for his reply. West Papua has some of the greatest forests in the world. Unfortunately, they are rapidly being cleared to produce coconut oil and for other agri purposes. The other dimension is, of course, that West Papua is occupied by Indonesia and there is a heavy military presence. As a result of this, sometimes the local indigenous population are pushed off their ground to make way for these plantations. Will His Majesty’s Government make representations to the Government of Indonesia—the Minister just said they work closely with them—to protect the rights of the local people? As one placard of a protest group put it, West Papua is not an empty land.
I thank the Minister for his reply. West Papua has some of the greatest forests in the world. Unfortunately, they are rapidly being cleared to produce coconut oil and for other agri purposes. The other dimension is, of course, that West Papua is occupied by Indonesia and there is a heavy military presence. As a result of this, sometimes the local indigenous population are pushed off their ground to make way for these plantations. Will His Majesty’s Government make representations to the Government of Indonesia—the Minister just said they work closely with them—to protect the rights of the local people? As one placard of a protest group put it, West Papua is not an empty land.
I thank the noble and right reverend Lord for his question on this important issue. The UK respects the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Indonesia, including the region of Papua. We support the efforts of the Indonesian authorities and civil society to address the needs and aspirations of the Papuan people. All Papuans need to benefit from the development of the region. Where we have human rights concerns, we raise them, as we have done at both ministerial and senior official level. We continue to support a visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to the region. Our UK mission in Geneva raised this with the high commissioner’s office in April 2025, and we have encouraged both parties to agree dates.
Does the Minister agree that one of the reasons for such widespread disillusion in our society about public life is the failure of both companies and people to be held properly to account after a disaster? Looking not just at Grenfell but more widely, what more could the Government do to reassure the general public that both companies and individual people will be held responsible when things go wrong?
Does the Minister agree that one of the reasons for such widespread disillusion in our society about public life is the failure of both companies and people to be held properly to account after a disaster? Looking not just at Grenfell but more widely, what more could the Government do to reassure the general public that both companies and individual people will be held responsible when things go wrong?
It is very important that those responsible for such issues are held to account as quickly as possible. There will eventually be a duty of candour, ensuring that those who are questioned on such matters respond in a timely and honest way. However, in this case the legal and investigative matters are sitting with the appropriate authorities, and it is very important that we let them carry out their work effectively. It is the shared responsibility of
government, regulators and industry to deliver legislative and systemic change when an issue such as this comes forward. We will take every recommendation made to us. We have already delivered significant reforms to building safety, but it is very important that the accountability phase is carried out thoroughly and properly and that people can feel that those responsible for this most horrendous of tragedies are held to account.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of India about the position of minorities in that country.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what representations they are making to the government of India about the position of minorities in that country.
My Lords, India is a multifaith, multi-ethnic and multilingual democracy, and it remains among the most diverse societies in the world. It is home to Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Muslims, Christians and several other religions. India should be proud of this diversity. The UK maintains a broad, deep and respectful partnership with India, which includes dialogue on human rights and minority issues. The British high commission in New Delhi, along with our wider network across India, monitors the human rights situation and engages with government and civil society stakeholders. Where concerns arise, we raise them directly with Indian counterparts.
I thank the Minister for her reply. As she said, India is one of the great democracies of the world, and it is even more sad that the present Government are so repressive of a range of minorities, so that even academics, if they speak up against the Government, find themselves oppressed. I particularly draw the Minister’s attention to the adivasi community, whose traditional tribal lands are now heavily militarised. For example, in the Bastar region of the state of Chhattisgarh, there are armed encampments all along the main roads and, for every nine civilians, there is one armed guard, leading inevitably to human rights abuses and the imprisonment of innocent protesters. What steps are the Government taking to make representations to the Indian Government about the adivasi community in particular?
I thank the Minister for her reply. As she said, India is one of the great democracies of the world, and it is even more sad that the present Government are so repressive of a range of minorities, so that even academics, if they speak up against the Government, find themselves oppressed. I particularly draw the Minister’s attention to the adivasi community, whose traditional tribal lands are now heavily militarised. For example, in the Bastar region of the state of Chhattisgarh, there are armed encampments all along the main roads and, for every nine civilians, there is one armed guard, leading inevitably to human rights abuses and the imprisonment of innocent protesters. What steps are the Government taking to make representations to the Indian Government about the adivasi community in particular?
I thank the noble and right reverend Lord for bringing our attention to this. It is an important issue and he is right to raise it. We have our network across India and will raise issues such as those that he mentions. We keep a close eye on human rights in India. Human rights are of course universal and, whatever the nature of our relationship with any Government, we are not afraid to raise issues as and when we need to.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to safeguard human rights in their proposed trade agreement with Gulf states.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to safeguard human rights in their proposed trade agreement with Gulf states.
My Lords, the UK is a leading advocate for human rights around the world. We remain committed to the promotion of human rights. This Government are in negotiations for a free trade agreement with the Gulf Cooperation Council, comprising Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. An FTA such as this one with the GCC can increase UK influence and help us have open conversations with partners on a range of issues, including human rights. Where necessary, the UK will draw on our full range of tools and levers, including our independent global human rights sanctions regime, to hold to account those involved in serious human rights violations and abuses.
I thank the Minister for her reply. Obviously, there is some variation among the six countries that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council in their attitude to human rights, but it is widely recognised that there are major failures in the areas of migrant labour, the position of women, LGBTQ people, freedom of expression, and access to justice. We understand that there will be some mention of human rights in this proposed trade deal, but would it not be much more effective if it was made legally binding? Surely we should not go for a good trade deal —which of course is very beneficial in itself—at the expense of recognition of human rights by the countries with which we are trading.
I thank the Minister for her reply. Obviously, there is some variation among the six countries that make up the Gulf Cooperation Council in their attitude to human rights, but it is widely recognised that there are major failures in the areas of migrant labour, the position of women, LGBTQ people, freedom of expression, and access to justice. We understand that there will be some mention of human rights in this proposed trade deal, but would it not be much more effective if it was made legally binding? Surely we should not go for a good trade deal —which of course is very beneficial in itself—at the expense of recognition of human rights by the countries with which we are trading.
Free trade agreements such as this are hugely beneficial to both economies, and I do not think that is at the cost of things such as human rights. It is really important that we all hold dear to us our own standards and become huge ambassadors and advocates for those standards around the world.
Where you are best able effect change is by having standards such as labour provisioning and against forced labour, and where you are able to articulate those within free trade agreements, you should really consider and use those opportunities to do that. When it comes to much broader policies about how you set out and articulate much wider, free-ranging ambitions, I do not necessarily see that those free trade agreements are always the place to do that. Instead, those are conversations that are being had between organisations such as the FCDO and direct counterparts within each of these countries, to work with them collaboratively and co-operatively, to share best practice, to help and support and to raise their ambitions. I do not think this is something that you can simply document as an ambition on a piece of paper and put it away in a cupboard for years and years until it is renegotiated; it is the consequence of consistent and live ongoing conversations.
My Lords, what conversations has the Minister had with the First Minister about universities? We know that all universities are under very severe pressure, but universities in Wales seem to be particularly hard hit. Cardiff University, for example, has had to close its music, theology and nursing departments. What conversations has she had with them?
My Lords, what conversations has the Minister had with the First Minister about universities? We know that all universities are under very severe pressure, but universities in Wales seem to be particularly hard hit. Cardiff University, for example, has had to close its music, theology and nursing departments. What conversations has she had with them?
My Lords, sometimes it is very helpful when colleagues are sitting next to you on the Front Bench. My noble friend Lady Smith has met with Wales’s Universities Minister to discuss the challenges being faced, and I assure the noble and right reverend Lord that conversations are ongoing.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is their response to the poll, published by FGS Global in January, which found that one in five people aged 18 to 45 in the United Kingdom prefer unelected strong leaders to democracy.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is their response to the poll, published by FGS Global in January, which found that one in five people aged 18 to 45 in the United Kingdom prefer unelected strong leaders to democracy.
My Lords, before I start, as this is my lasting outing, I would like to wish everyone happy Easter and Pesach sameach for the imminent Recess.
Internationally, democracy is under attack. The Defending Democracy Taskforce brings a whole-of-government effort to defend against that threat and uphold the rule of law, but we must go further to restore trust in politics. That is why we have committed to a reset in public life, restoring a culture of service and deepening democracy through constitutional reform. Every political party has a role to play in this mission, and that includes every Member of your Lordships’ House. We all have a responsibility to cherish, defend and promote the core values of democracy.
I thank the Minister for her reply. As she rightly said, democracy is a fragile achievement and it is under threat throughout the world. In the light of that, what does she think of the appalling failure somewhere in our society that these figures reveal, with so many young people preferring an unelected leader to democracy? The Ties that Bind, a report of your Lordships’ House chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, located this in the failure of citizenship education in schools.
I know the Minister can answer only on behalf of the Home Office, but would it be prepared to work with the Department for Education to ensure that future generations are better educated about the value of our democratic way of life than previous generations?
I thank the Minister for her reply. As she rightly said, democracy is a fragile achievement and it is under threat throughout the world. In the light of that, what does she think of the appalling failure somewhere in our society that these figures reveal, with so many young people preferring an unelected leader to democracy? The Ties that Bind, a report of your Lordships’ House chaired by the noble Lord, Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts, located this in the failure of citizenship education in schools.
I know the Minister can answer only on behalf of the Home Office, but would it be prepared to work with the Department for Education to ensure that future generations are better educated about the value of our democratic way of life than previous generations?
My Lords, citizenship education is incredibly important. That is why the last Government ensured that active citizenship was taught as part of the national curriculum, which this Government are continuing. We are currently in the process of a national curriculum review, which will report shortly. I would be amazed if active citizenship and citizenship are not included. However, we all have a responsibility to do this, such as through the Learn with the Lords programme and active participation, to make sure that young people genuinely understand what we do and why we are not all the same and why there is a difference. I urge noble Lords to participate in that programme and to use the imminent VE Day celebrations to celebrate democracy against tyranny.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is their response to reports that Rwandan troops are supporting the M23 group in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what is their response to reports that Rwandan troops are supporting the M23 group in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
My Lords, the United Kingdom condemns the recent M23 and Rwandan Defence Force advances in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo as an unacceptable breach of DRC’s sovereignty. On 22 February the Foreign Secretary met with President Kagame and was clear that there can be no military solution. The United Kingdom today announced several policy measures, which we will maintain until there is a withdrawal of all RDF from the Congolese territory.