Lords Drive Skills and Voting Reforms as Nature Levy Amended

High-Level Summary

The House of Lords sat for introductions, three topical Oral Questions, a major take‑note debate on skills and education, a short debate on parcel deliveries featuring a maiden ministerial speech, a strategic debate on the Government’s priorities, and approval of nature restoration regulations with an amendment. Ministers confirmed plans to legislate to mitigate the Supreme Court’s PACCAR judgment and introduce proportionate regulation of litigation funding, to develop automated voter registration and extend the vote to 16 and 17 year‑olds, and to strengthen drought preparedness and new reservoir capacity. The skills debate underscored devolution and locally shaped technical routes from age 14, alongside investment in apprenticeships and technical excellence colleges. Peers pressed for urgency on litigation funding reform, clarity on the Office for Students’ powers in light of high‑profile allegations, and stronger oversight of parcel delivery complaints. The House agreed an amendment regretting aspects of the Nature Restoration Levy Regulations and then approved the motion as amended following a division (Ayes 41, Noes 29).

Detailed Summary

Introductions of new Members

Baroness Mackenzie of Sherwood was introduced and made the solemn affirmation, supported by Baroness Nye and Baroness Hunter of Auchenreoch. Lord Sarwar was introduced and took the oath, supported by Lord Robertson of Port Ellen and Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke.

Opt-out collective actions and litigation funding (PACCAR) – Oral Question

Lord Carlile of Berriew asked about reversing the Supreme Court’s PACCAR decision and the timing for legislation. The Minister, Lord Lemos, said the Government had accepted the Civil Justice Council’s recommendations and “will legislate to mitigate the effects of the PACCAR judgment” and introduce “proportionate regulation of litigation funding agreements” when “parliamentary time allows”. Lord Carlile pressed why a short Bill promised before the 2024 election had not been brought forward. Lord Arbuthnot cited Sir Alan Bates’ Post Office case; the Minister agreed that “third-party funding is crucial for enabling ordinary people to access justice”. Peers urged urgency. Asked what was causing delay, the Minister said it was competition for legislative time—“it is people like me and other Ministers competing for legislative time”—and confirmed it was not blocked by the Treasury. No date was given for legislation.

Office for Students: academic misconduct allegations – Oral Question

Lord Young of Acton asked whether to give the Office for Students (OfS) explicit power to investigate serious academic misconduct where a university declines an independent inquiry. The Minister, Baroness Smith of Malvern, said universities are autonomous and the OfS “already has the power to investigate and take regulatory action” when providers fall below minimum requirements. Referring to the Jason Arday case, she said Cambridge was establishing an independent investigation and had assured that terms of reference would be announced imminently and that it would be “independent and rigorous”. She noted leadership rests primarily with institutions, with “a role for Ofsted” regarding teacher training, and that the OfS can regulate academic standards. Responding to concerns about inertia, she said, “If the noble Baroness wants me to take knee-jerk action on the basis of news headlines, I am afraid that is not something I am willing to do”.

Voter registration, election turnout and compulsory voting – Oral Question

Lord Rennard asked about Australia’s higher registration and turnout, and compulsory voting and automatic voter registration (AVR). The Minister, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, said the Government had examined Australia’s system and are working to create a new AVR system over the coming years, noting the iteration and testing needed for high‑quality data. She emphasised removing barriers through steps in the Representation of the People Bill and an iterative approach, ruled out piloting compulsory voting at this time, and confirmed plans to enfranchise 16 and 17 year‑olds “in good time ahead of the next general election” with civic education support. She also cited a £2.5 million democratic engagement fund offering grants, with projects expected to complete by January 2028.

Summer drought: future supply disruption – Oral Question

Lord John of Southwark asked about lessons from the summer drought and minimising future supply disruption. The Minister, Baroness Hayman of Ullock, said climate change increases risks and that government had intensified engagement, including more frequent National Drought Group meetings. She outlined plans for nine large reservoirs, planning changes to accelerate delivery, and a cross‑government Water Delivery Taskforce, with Havant Thicket due in 2031 and others from 2035. Peers urged support for on‑farm reservoirs; the Minister agreed. She said a new water Bill was expected “shortly”, noted a report that “public ownership was not the same as nationalisation”, and described weekly National Drought Group meetings, flood working groups and long‑term plans to prepare for El Niño impacts.

Arrangement of Business – Advisory

The Government Chief Whip reminded Members to keep to speaking time limits so the Minister could respond fully: “speeches in the debate should be limited to three minutes”.

Skills, vocational training, and further and higher education – Motion to Take Note

Baroness Morgan of Huyton led a wide‑ranging debate on improving outcomes for disadvantaged communities and regional growth. She argued that “no vocational offer can compensate for weak literacy and numeracy” and warned against binary routes: “we must not build two separate systems… sorting children at 14 or 16… is… wrong”. She called for FE‑employer partnerships and noted apprenticeship starts for 16 year‑olds have fallen by 40%. Lord Baker urged technical routes from 14 and expansion of UTC “sleeves”, adding, “We must start at 14”. Other contributions covered youth social action—“over half of 16 to 20 year-olds said that social action had improved their self-confidence”—creative and dance pipelines, inclusion of girls in STEM, disadvantaged groups including Gypsy, Roma and Travellers, cadets, AI skills and adult education. Replying, the Minister, Baroness Smith of Malvern, framed skills as a devolved, place‑based endeavour and announced “new prestigious technical education routes, giving 14 year-olds earlier access to technical skills” shaped locally, investment in technical excellence colleges, and apprenticeships—“an additional £1 billion investment to support 50,000 more young people into apprenticeships over the next three years”. She emphasised a tertiary system linking FE and HE and support for adult skills. The motion was agreed without division.

Representation of the People Bill – First Reading

The Bill was brought from the Commons, read a first time and ordered to be printed. Earlier exchanges referred to forthcoming measures to simplify voting processes and extend the franchise to 16 and 17 year‑olds.

Parcel delivery services – Question for Short Debate (maiden ministerial speech)

Lord Pack asked about improving the quality and reliability of parcel delivery services, especially for small businesses and vulnerable consumers. He cited Ofcom data showing that only 45% of those who contacted a delivery company about an issue were satisfied with the outcome and contrasted this to broader customer service averages; he also highlighted InPost’s website advice to complain to retailers, arguing this “is not what Ofcom’s rules say”. Peers questioned Ofcom’s effectiveness, Royal Mail’s obligations and costs, and whether fines improve outcomes; Lord Mott sought “a clear timetable for assessing the effectiveness of Ofcom’s current approach”. Responding in his maiden speech as Minister of State for Trade, Lord Sarwar pledged to meet peers and to press Ofcom and operators, noting parcel volumes of 4.2 billion last year and that “satisfaction is relatively high, but… complaints handling is nowhere near good enough”. He set his broader mission “to make the UK the most connected economy in the world”.

Government political priorities and legislative agenda – Motion to Take Note

Opening, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath said the country faces considerable challenges and quoted the Prime Minister: “Things are not working as they should. Life is too expensive and too hard for too many”. He stressed devolution—establishing “No. 10 North”—growth, no retreat on net zero, reform of energy pricing, tackling nearly 1 million young people NEET, and expanding technical education. Members raised homelessness, the Windrush compensation scheme, waste crime enforcement, defence spending and European relations. Baroness Benjamin urged parity for Windrush claimants, noting they “have been denied free legal help” and the lack of an independent appeal. Lord Frost asked for clarity on the Government’s EU ‘reset’ objectives and outcomes. Closing, Lord Collins of Highbury outlined four strands: shifting decision‑making out of Westminster—“No. 10 North in Manchester as an engine room for devolution”; driving reindustrialisation and good growth, including “a 20% business rate discount for pubs, clubs and live music venues” and a £2 cap on bus fares; and tackling intractable issues such as social care and rough sleeping with a “£442 million” package. He reaffirmed the defence commitment “to 3.5% of GDP… by 2035” and a closer EU relationship without joining the single market or customs union. He also confirmed measures to strengthen democracy, including “a cap of £100,000 on political donations… and the ban on cryptocurrencies” in party finance. The motion was agreed without division.

Nature Restoration Levy Regulations 2026 – Motion to Approve (with amendment)

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage introduced regulations creating the Nature Restoration Levy (NRL) to fund conservation measures in Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs). She said the levy is not designed to undermine viability and would offer a clearer, streamlined route to meet environmental obligations, with Natural England consulting on charging schedules and levy funds restricted to EDP measures and administration. Lord Roborough moved an amendment of regret that the regulations do not require Natural England to consider development viability and other contributions. He cited concerns about Natural England’s performance and warned that ignoring viability risks making developments unviable, asking when the levy could be mandatory. Other peers raised the short 28‑day consultation, absence of a full impact assessment, potential use of public funds to offset private harm, and risks to existing nutrient neutrality and biodiversity markets. Replying, the Minister said Defra would sign off EDPs; Natural England is the appropriate delivery body; the mitigation hierarchy is preserved in regulations; and “in all but exceptional circumstances, EDPs are voluntary for developers”, with rates reflecting delivery costs. She added that instalments could be allowed but the first must be paid before development starts. The House agreed Lord Roborough’s amendment after a division—“Ayes 41, Noes 29”—and then agreed the motion as amended.