1-20 of 645 results for primarymember:"Lord Fowler"
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.382 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.004 seconds
- Search query
- primarymember:"Lord Fowler"
- We searched for
- primaryMember_ses:300585
Type
House
Session
More
Year
More
Department
More
Member
More
Primary member
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
My Lords, HIV/AIDS may have gone off the front pages here in Britain, rightly or wrongly, but what is beyond doubt is that it remains a serious scourge in many countries overseas. How do our overseas assistance programmes, current and future, measure up to that specific and very serious challenge?
My Lords, HIV/AIDS may have gone off the front pages here in Britain, rightly or wrongly, but what is beyond doubt is that it remains a serious scourge in many countries overseas. How do our overseas assistance programmes, current and future, measure up to that specific and very serious challenge?
It is absolutely a serious challenge. While we see medical advances that enable us to make progress, we see problems emerge in other areas. We see prevalence among young girls, in particular, increasing to a worrying extent. This is one of the reasons that we decided to maintain a very strong commitment to the Global Fund, which as noble Lords will know, fights three diseases, one of which is HIV. We work closely with the Global Fund and our country partners in order to keep going on this battle, which we are making progress with, but there is still an awful lot more to do.
Lords motion to take note of recent developments in relation to broadcasting in the United Kingdom. Agreed to on question.
Lords motion to take note of recent developments in relation to broadcasting in the United Kingdom. Agreed to on question.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Today on World AIDS Day, we acknowledge the radical reduction that there has been in deaths from AIDS over past years, with deaths reducing worldwide from 1.4 million a year in 2010 to the present total of around 630,000. I hope that we will also acknowledge the terrible irony that, in spite of this success and in spite of the breakthrough with new drugs, nations, led regrettably by the United States but including others such as Britain, are cutting their overseas budgets. Surely, we will not be forgiven if we reject the exceptional opportunity we have now to eradicate AIDS as a public health threat as quickly as humanly possible.
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Today on World AIDS Day, we acknowledge the radical reduction that there has been in deaths from AIDS over past years, with deaths reducing worldwide from 1.4 million a year in 2010 to the present total of around 630,000. I hope that we will also acknowledge the terrible irony that, in spite of this success and in spite of the breakthrough with new drugs, nations, led regrettably by the United States but including others such as Britain, are cutting their overseas budgets. Surely, we will not be forgiven if we reject the exceptional opportunity we have now to eradicate AIDS as a public health threat as quickly as humanly possible.
We would not be forgiven, but that is not what we are doing. We are now the third-biggest contributor to the Global Fund, which is the world’s leading mechanism for fighting AIDS, TB and malaria, and we have continued to fund UNAIDS. We work through Unitaid and with the Robert Carr Fund. The UK is doing everything that it can, internationally and domestically, to fight HIV and AIDS. We must not forget the work that we are doing to fight against the rollback of LGBT rights, the absence of which does so much harm to prevention and promotes the stigmatisation that leads to people being unable to access their treatment. I respect the incredible work that the noble Lord has done over very many years and I look forward to continuing to be held to account by him on this vital issue.
To ask His Majesty’s Government, in the light of World Aids Day 2025, when they estimate that the goal of eliminating AIDS as a public health threat will be reached.
To ask His Majesty’s Government, in the light of World Aids Day 2025, when they estimate that the goal of eliminating AIDS as a public health threat will be reached.
My Lords, the global response to HIV and AIDS has seen outstanding achievements, with infections up to 40% lower globally than in 2010. But, despite this, our work is not done. The UK Government remain firmly committed to eliminating AIDS as a public health threat, and we are proud to continue our support to the organisations at the forefront of the HIV response, including the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, whose eighth replenishment we co-hosted, alongside South Africa and UNAIDS.
My Lords, I entirely support the case made by the noble Lord, Lord Black, but I urge the Government to go further. About 9 million people in the world who need HIV treatment are not receiving it at present. That position is being seriously worsened by the American Government’s regrettable decision to cut healthcare provision in so many programmes. Will the Government now lead a new international effort to increase funding to counter this new threat, which is becoming more and more obvious around the world?
My Lords, I entirely support the case made by the noble Lord, Lord Black, but I urge the Government to go further. About 9 million people in the world who need HIV treatment are not receiving it at present. That position is being seriously worsened by the American Government’s regrettable decision to cut healthcare provision in so many programmes. Will the Government now lead a new international effort to increase funding to counter this new threat, which is becoming more and more obvious around the world?
As I am sure the noble Lord is aware and welcomes, alongside South Africa, the UK is leading the campaign to raise investment for the Global Fund’s next three-year funding cycle. I assure him that we will, as he does, continue to champion global health and certainly remain committed to UK support for the Global Fund. UN aid also plays a very important role in the response and our funding has contributed towards preventing new cases in key populations. Long may that continue.
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their estimate of the reduction in resources provided by the Government and voluntary sector to tackle HIV and AIDS domestically since the beginning of the year.
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their estimate of the reduction in resources provided by the Government and voluntary sector to tackle HIV and AIDS domestically since the beginning of the year.
The Government is committed to ending HIV transmissions within England by 2030 and is developing the new HIV Action Plan, which we aim to publish this year.
There has been no reduction in resources provided by the Government to address HIV domestically since the beginning of the year.
In 2025/2026, the Government has increased funding through the ringfenced Public Health Grant, and the 100% retained business rate arrangement for local authorities in Greater Manchester, to £3.858 billion. This represents a significant turning point for local health services, marking the biggest real-terms increase after nearly a decade of reduced spending.
£27 million of additional funding was confirmed for 2025/26 to expand and continue the highly successful National Health Service emergency department opt-out HIV testing programme until March 2026, which has helped to identify more than 1,500 untreated or undiagnosed HIV cases in its first 36 months.
Furthermore, HIV Prevention England, which is the national HIV prevention programme for England funded by the Department and delivered by the Terrence Higgins Trust, has been extended for a year until March 2026, and is backed by £1.5 million of additional funding.
The Government has not estimated the HIV/AIDS resources provided by the voluntary sector.
My Lords, I very much appreciate the Answer that the Minister has given, but does she agree with me that there is far too much satisfaction shown by financial spokesmen on the reduction in overseas aid, given that the certain outcome is more illness and more death, particularly among women and small children?
My Lords, I very much appreciate the Answer that the Minister has given, but does she agree with me that there is far too much satisfaction shown by financial spokesmen on the reduction in overseas aid, given that the certain outcome is more illness and more death, particularly among women and small children?
I am not sure which financial spokespeople the noble Lord is speaking about. On behalf of the Government, I can say that the decision to reduce our ODA spend was taken in order to invest more in defence. That is a decision I support; it was the right decision to take at that particular point in time. It is our hope that, in time, as the economy improves, we can increase our spending. We understand the long-term benefits of enabling countries to develop and to become safe and more secure, more prosperous and able to stand on their own two feet. This is what countries are telling us repeatedly. They want to be partners with us and move on from simply being recipients of aid.
My Lords, I know that, in my day, when I was party chairman—before I became independent—some of the biggest political donors were the trade unions. Does this review include the trade unions and the restrictions that could be placed on them?
My Lords, I know that, in my day, when I was party chairman—before I became independent—some of the biggest political donors were the trade unions. Does this review include the trade unions and the restrictions that could be placed on them?
My Lords, to the noble Lord’s question, your Lordships will have to wait until summer, when we will set out our strategy. The Deputy Prime Minister is absolutely keen, in her role as Secretary of State for MHCLG, to ensure that we have strong electoral reforms ready for the next election.
My Lords, surely the only way of reaching some agreement on the size of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is by allowing in the international press and television. They can report on what is actually happening there, as opposed to putting and leaving it in the hands of the public relations people. Should that not be one of the first priorities of the Government in their international discussions?
My Lords, surely the only way of reaching some agreement on the size of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is by allowing in the international press and television. They can report on what is actually happening there, as opposed to putting and leaving it in the hands of the public relations people. Should that not be one of the first priorities of the Government in their international discussions?
Our first priority, as I have made very clear, is to get food to the people who are starving. The noble Lord is right that that is not being helped by the inability of journalists to report accurately what is happening in Gaza. I do not know the precise reasons the Israeli Government have for not permitting journalists to do their job. I know that there are journalists who, despite the undoubtedly enormous risk to themselves, would be willing to undertake that task. It would be far preferable for us to have accurate reporting.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the United States of America’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization on the global treatment of HIV/AIDS.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the United States of America’s withdrawal from the World Health Organization on the global treatment of HIV/AIDS.
My Lords, I pay tribute to the noble Lord, Lord Fowler, for the work that he has done on this agenda over very many decades. The UK will continue to work with the World Health Organization, member states and other partners to support the WHO’s ongoing transformation and to strengthen its efficiency, transparency and responsiveness. We are proud of our long-standing support for global health organisations at the core of the response to HIV/AIDS and we continue to support efforts to end AIDS as a public health threat by 2030.
My Lords, I am grateful for that reply. There have been, to date, 40 million deaths from AIDS across the world. Because of the success of efforts over the last years, official predictions were that AIDS could be eliminated as a public health disease by 2030, as the Minister has just said, but that was before the abrupt and recent changes of policy by the American Administration, which have caused havoc across the world. Is it really the Government’s view that the 2030 target is achievable in the new conditions? Do they share the view of most medical experts that the American policies are leading the world backwards, to defeat, in a vital area of public health?
My Lords, I am grateful for that reply. There have been, to date, 40 million deaths from AIDS across the world. Because of the success of efforts over the last years, official predictions were that AIDS could be eliminated as a public health disease by 2030, as the Minister has just said, but that was before the abrupt and recent changes of policy by the American Administration, which have caused havoc across the world. Is it really the Government’s view that the 2030 target is achievable in the new conditions? Do they share the view of most medical experts that the American policies are leading the world backwards, to defeat, in a vital area of public health?
I do not think it has made it any easier, but we stand by our commitment to do this by 2030. There are some things in our favour around medical advances and new treatments, and a willingness of some Governments now to play a part that perhaps they have not been able to in the past. There is no doubt that the situation is now more challenging, but we will work as firmly and with as much energy as we ever have towards this goal, because it is important that we do.
My Lords, is it not true that we have not used community pharmacies in this country to their full potential? That impression was confirmed for me when I was chairman of such a group. Should our policy not be to develop community pharmacies so that they make an even bigger contribution to public health in this country? Would it not be better if pharmacists’ income came from that kind of effort, rather than from asking them to rely on the sale of cosmetics and other over the counter, commercial products?
My Lords, is it not true that we have not used community pharmacies in this country to their full potential? That impression was confirmed for me when I was chairman of such a group. Should our policy not be to develop community pharmacies so that they make an even bigger contribution to public health in this country? Would it not be better if pharmacists’ income came from that kind of effort, rather than from asking them to rely on the sale of cosmetics and other over the counter, commercial products?
Commercial over the counter products will have a part to play. However, I take the point that the noble Lord makes. I am sure it is true that their vital role, and the opportunities that they offer, were not exploited as much as they could have been—when I say “exploited”, I mean that in a positive way. The Minister for Care, Stephen Kinnock, issued a press release today. In his last point he says:
“I am committed to working closely with Community Pharmacy England to agree a package of funding that is reflective of the important support that they provide to patients up and down the country. I am confident that together we can get the sector back on its feet and fit for pharmacies and patients long into the future”.
I agree entirely with the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, but is there not a case for a review that goes rather wider than just political contributions from overseas? We have the issue, for example, of whether there should be a cap on all contributions made. Surely, above all, we need a system that is entirely honest and seen as such around the world. Compared with some of the things that are happening now, that would not be a bad example.
I agree entirely with the noble Lord, Lord Dubs, but is there not a case for a review that goes rather wider than just political contributions from overseas? We have the issue, for example, of whether there should be a cap on all contributions made. Surely, above all, we need a system that is entirely honest and seen as such around the world. Compared with some of the things that are happening now, that would not be a bad example.
My Lords, the noble Lord makes an excellent point. A cap on donations is not a current priority, but strengthening the rules around donations is. By law, it is the responsibility of political parties to take reasonable steps to verify the identity of a donor and whether they are permissible. We will take any necessary steps to ensure that those requirements are tightened and abided by.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to reduce the number of peers who are eligible to sit in the House of Lords.
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to reduce the number of peers who are eligible to sit in the House of Lords.
My Lords, the scrutiny and challenge role of the House of Lords is important, but the House has grown in size as introductions have increased faster than departures. The Government’s manifesto outlines several measures that could have the effect of reducing the size of the House. The first is the removal of hereditary Peers; further measures include retirement age and participation requirements. I am grateful for the debate that we had last month and the engagement of colleagues from across the House on these issues. I am keen to continue this ongoing dialogue about how best to implement these commitments.
I thank the noble Baroness the Leader of the House. If the aim of the Government is to reduce the size of the House, is not the most important action they can take to make an immediate commitment to follow a policy of restraint in making new appointments?
I agree with what I hope was the noble Baroness’s view that hereditary Peers make a big contribution to the work of this House. Against that, there are some appointed Peers who over the years have made little or no contribution to the House. They may be better candidates for removal than the hereditary Peers.
I thank the noble Baroness the Leader of the House. If the aim of the Government is to reduce the size of the House, is not the most important action they can take to make an immediate commitment to follow a policy of restraint in making new appointments?
I agree with what I hope was the noble Baroness’s view that hereditary Peers make a big contribution to the work of this House. Against that, there are some appointed Peers who over the years have made little or no contribution to the House. They may be better candidates for removal than the hereditary Peers.
First, I pay tribute to the noble Lord, who has been passionate on this issue for the same reason most of us are—we want an effective House that does the job it is charged with. His point about new appointments might have been better addressed to the last Government—I know he tried—because when the Labour Government left office after 12 years, we had 24 more Peers than the Opposition, but when the Conservatives left office they had 100 more Peers than the Labour Party. That difference between Government and Opposition, regardless of the parties, is too great. I am on record as saying that the House works better when the main party of government and of opposition have roughly equal numbers.
The noble Lord is absolutely right about participation, and I have been grateful to noble Lords from across the House who have suggested ways forward that we might look at. We will continue that dialogue on how we can have the most effective House possible, to ensure that it does the job it is here to do.
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Deech. The most important people in any news organisation, surely, are not the armchair correspondents, commentators or, for that matter, critics but the reporters. Is it not a fact that the BBC has a reputation around the world for the accuracy of its reporting? Surely our concern should be not the BBC but the overseas Governments who exclude outside reporters from what is happening on the ground in their countries.
My Lords, I do not agree with the noble Baroness, Lady Deech. The most important people in any news organisation, surely, are not the armchair correspondents, commentators or, for that matter, critics but the reporters. Is it not a fact that the BBC has a reputation around the world for the accuracy of its reporting? Surely our concern should be not the BBC but the overseas Governments who exclude outside reporters from what is happening on the ground in their countries.
I agree that the BBC has a very positive reputation overseas. The correct handling of complaints is part of that reputation and sustains
it. It is a really important part of our soft diplomacy, which is why the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, announced yesterday that the Government will provide the BBC World Service with a funding uplift of £32.6 million in 2025-26.
My Lords, no one fought harder for the elimination of dental deserts than Lord Colwyn, who died recently and whom most of us in this House remember. Would not the best memorial to Lord Colwyn be to place a new priority on dental services particularly for children? As well as making that a priority, and to show that it is, should we not allocate it a budget?
My Lords, no one fought harder for the elimination of dental deserts than Lord Colwyn, who died recently and whom most of us in this House remember. Would not the best memorial to Lord Colwyn be to place a new priority on dental services particularly for children? As well as making that a priority, and to show that it is, should we not allocate it a budget?
I would like to associate these Benches with the comments made by the noble Lord about the late Lord Colwyn, whose contribution was indeed considerable. I agree that that would be a very appropriate legacy to his memory. The fact is that we are in the position that the previous Government’s dentistry recovery plan did not go far enough and, as we all know, there are too many people struggling to find an NHS appointment. As part of our 10-year plan we are working to assess the need for more dental trainees in areas including the east of England, which the previous noble Lord referred to, because many people continue to struggle. This cannot go on, not least because prevention is absolutely crucial as we move towards making an NHS fit for the future.
My Lords, I declare an interest as an ambassador for UNAIDS. Is it not a fact that we have been extremely successful in developing the means to combat HIV and AIDS, but we still face the obstacle of stigma around the whole subject, which is a serious deterrent for treatment and continuing treatment, as the noble Lord, Lord Black, suggested? Will the Government
make the fighting of stigma around HIV a priority, so that we can become one of the first countries to be absolutely AIDS free?
My Lords, I declare an interest as an ambassador for UNAIDS. Is it not a fact that we have been extremely successful in developing the means to combat HIV and AIDS, but we still face the obstacle of stigma around the whole subject, which is a serious deterrent for treatment and continuing treatment, as the noble Lord, Lord Black, suggested? Will the Government
make the fighting of stigma around HIV a priority, so that we can become one of the first countries to be absolutely AIDS free?
The noble Lord’s campaign in this area is very well regarded, and for good reason; I certainly agree with him. The fact is that engagement in care is strongly affected by a number of factors, including a person’s well-being and quality of life, discrimination and, as the noble Lord says, stigma. That, alongside accessibility of service, will define how successful we are. I am keen that our new plan will absolutely take account of stigma.
My Lords, I entirely support what the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, just said about Uganda, but should we not also be concerned about the position in many other countries around the world?
There is a terrible worldwide toll of over 600,000 deaths a year from HIV and AIDS. Should we not recognise that the threat of unjustified heavy sentences can add to the problem by preventing people coming forward for treatment and add to the stigma that is already around AIDS?
My Lords, I entirely support what the noble Lord, Lord Cashman, just said about Uganda, but should we not also be concerned about the position in many other countries around the world?
There is a terrible worldwide toll of over 600,000 deaths a year from HIV and AIDS. Should we not recognise that the threat of unjustified heavy sentences can add to the problem by preventing people coming forward for treatment and add to the stigma that is already around AIDS?
The noble Lord has done so much work in this area, and of course we agree with him. The problem with this kind of legislation is that it deters people from seeking the medical help that they need for what is now a curable disease, maybe to the point where it is not curable for them because they have been put off seeking the support they need. The UK will continue, through its ODA programme, to make sure it supports proper access to medical services. That will be dealt with on an absolutely fair and open basis and not in the discriminatory way that these laws promote.
My Lords, the noble Lord asks for consideration of
“a form of military national service”.
As one of the last national servicemen in the 1950s, I think he is wise to put it that way. I have no personal complaints, but I observe that not everyone had happy memories of this period. Otherwise, you would not have had conscripts keeping lists of days and hours left to do, and the most popular recording on British forces radio in Germany for those nearing discharge would not have been “Happy Days Are Here Again”. I agree with the noble Lord that there is a strong case for looking at this again, but if we do I hope we will find something better than the 1950s model.
My Lords, the noble Lord asks for consideration of
“a form of military national service”.
As one of the last national servicemen in the 1950s, I think he is wise to put it that way. I have no personal complaints, but I observe that not everyone had happy memories of this period. Otherwise, you would not have had conscripts keeping lists of days and hours left to do, and the most popular recording on British forces radio in Germany for those nearing discharge would not have been “Happy Days Are Here Again”. I agree with the noble Lord that there is a strong case for looking at this again, but if we do I hope we will find something better than the 1950s model.
I cannot disagree with the noble Lord, but we have to rely on the fact that all three forces have a global reputation and are professional, highly trained and the envy of many. To dilute them with unwilling recruits, to a certain degree, can lead only to a slight dilution of that reputation.