Lords Advance Duty of Candour, Pass Social Housing

High-Level Summary

The House of Lords resumed with two introductions, agreed a Humble Address in response to the King’s message on Royal Household funding, and recorded announcements on members’ deaths and retirement. Oral Questions examined welfare reform, the proposed US–Saudi civil nuclear agreement, recent UK tax measures and competitiveness, touring barriers post‑EU exit, and UK support for flooding in Nepal. The House ordered consideration for the Financial Services and Markets Bill, passed the Social Housing Bill [HL] at Third Reading for transmission to the Commons, and conducted Second Reading of the Public Office (Accountability) Bill. Peers broadly backed the accountability Bill—centred on a statutory duty of candour, new offences and parity of legal aid at inquests—which was read a second time and committed to Committee; a procedural amendment seeking details of Commons scrutiny was withdrawn.

Detailed Summary

Formal business: Introductions, Humble Address, announcements, and Question Time guidance

Baroness Lowe of Armley and Lord Macintosh of Eastwood were introduced. The House agreed a Humble Address replying to the King’s message on Royal Household support: “Motion agreed nemine dissentiente”. The deaths of Lord Horam and Lord Snape and the retirement of Lord Jopling were formally announced. Ahead of Oral Questions, the Government Chief Whip reminded Members to keep contributions concise, urging they be “short, sharp, succinct and to the point” and that “it is called Question Time, not ‘speech time’”.

Oral Question: Working‑age welfare system

Answering for the Government, Baroness Sherlock said Ministers are prioritising reform “putting work and opportunity at the centre” and will respond to the Milburn and Timms reviews in the autumn. She described the current system as “not fit for purpose” and outlined actions including rebalancing universal credit, overhauling jobcentres, and personalised work programmes. On spending, she stated non‑pensions social security is “around 4.9% of GDP” and forecast to remain broadly stable to 2030‑31. She highlighted employment support for disabled people and the ‘connect to work’ programme working with individuals and employers, and, on adequacy, noted an above‑inflation rise in the universal credit standard rate alongside help with housing, heating and childcare.

Oral Question: Saudi Arabia’s nuclear power programme

Lord Wood said the proposed US–Saudi deal is a matter for those Governments, noting both are parties to the nuclear non‑proliferation treaty and Saudi Arabia has an IAEA safeguards agreement. As the deal text is unpublished, he could not comment on details but stressed UK support for civil nuclear expansion “alongside robust safeguards”, adding that agreements are lodged with the IAEA and include “bilateral safeguards”. On regional security, he said a diplomatic settlement around the Strait of Hormuz is needed and that “Iran must never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon”. He also cited opportunities for UK firms in small modular reactors.

Oral Question: UK business competitiveness and recent tax measures

Lord Pitt‑Watson said British business is competitive and that public services funded by taxation underpin it, adding “we should be thanking businesses for the huge burden they bear”. He cited indicators including the UK being the “number two destination for external investment” in a CEO survey and quotes such as “a great place to invest … You’re the envy of the world”. On employers’ NICs changes, he confirmed protections for the smallest firms but said “there is not a specific study” on SME growth impacts, emphasising the need to balance the books. He also pointed to industrial policy, planning reforms, new finance and trade deals as part of the growth strategy.

Oral Question: Touring—impact of EU exit

Baroness Twycross said a DCMS‑commissioned report evidences economic and practical impacts of post‑EU exit touring barriers, with mutual UK‑EU benefits from reducing them. She would not pre‑empt the UK–EU summit agenda but said the research will inform engagement, noting the report indicates the EU’s loss of GVA is “significantly greater than the loss to the UK”. As examples of cultural exchange, she welcomed the Bayeux Tapestry exhibition enabled by UK–France cooperation, and referred to the Prime Minister’s commitment to music and touring artists.

Private Notice Question: Nepal flooding—UK support

Lord Wood conveyed condolences and set out immediate aid: “the UK Government have provided £5 million in immediate humanitarian assistance” with rapid deployment teams and specialist humanitarian experts sent to the region. He supported helping Nepal “build back differently” drawing on UK expertise, and detailed funding via the Red Cross movement and Start Fund Nepal, plus deployment of UK humanitarian experts and strengthened co‑ordination. On British nationals, he said “we have 36 British people currently unaccounted for” and are working with Nepalese and Chinese authorities.

Financial Services and Markets Bill—order of consideration

The House agreed the marshalled order for the Bill’s Report stage: “Motion agreed”. The order sets Clause 1, Schedule 1, then Clauses 2–13, Schedule 2, and so on through to the Title.

Social Housing Bill [HL]—Third Reading

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage thanked contributors and said the Bill is crucial to supporting councils to “build at a scale not seen in decades,” confirming planned Commons amendments on protections for domestic abuse victims, right‑to‑buy rural criteria and the disposals notification period. Cross‑Bench contributions highlighted non‑legislative changes secured, including better‑defined rural exemptions and access for safety checks, alongside other improvements. Lord Young of Cookham pressed for further movement on shared ownership after an earlier Lords defeat, seeking talks before Commons stages. Baroness Taylor said the Government is not withdrawing right to buy but highlighted the failure to replace sold homes as a key problem to address. Outcome: “Bill passed and sent to the Commons”.

Public Office (Accountability) Bill—Second Reading

Introducing the Bill, Lord Lemos called it “one of the biggest constitutional changes in the relationship between the public and the state for generations”. Core measures include a statutory duty of candour and assistance—failure to comply with intent or recklessness being a criminal offence—and tailored handling of protected national security information via agency heads and existing safeguards. The Bill creates an offence of misleading the public where conduct is “seriously improper,” with penalties up to two years, replaces misconduct in public office with two statutory offences with higher maxima, and addresses parity of arms by extending non‑means‑tested legal aid at inquests because current asymmetry is “massive and indefensible”.

Peers broadly backed the aims while pressing for clarity and safeguards. Lord Keen sought precision on when the duty is triggered, how it interacts with other laws, and the privilege against self‑incrimination. Baroness Manningham‑Buller supported protecting intelligence but warned that servicing these duties may strain resources. The Bishop of Manchester said the new duty “may enable victims and families to get real answers that they can trust and to get them much more quickly than in the past”. Lord Beamish linked the culture‑change goal to cases like Horizon and confirmed the ISC is content that the security services are covered with safeguards. Baroness May urged explicit reference to the Independent Public Advocate and queried whether Clause 6 is overly cumbersome. Other contributions raised whistleblowing protections, unified ethical codes and oversight of inquiry recommendations. Outcome: “Bill read a second time” and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

Public Office (Accountability) Bill—Committee commitment and scheduling

The House ordered the Bill be committed to a Committee of the Whole House with a set order of consideration. Lord Rooker proposed (and then withdrew) an amendment to delay Committee until a Minister listed Commons provisions not considered on the floor, noting that “10 new clauses, six schedules and over 70 amendments were approved on the nod” under a guillotine Motion. The amendment was withdrawn and the main motion agreed.