Lords Debate Peacebuilding, Disability Reform and Refugee Sponsorship

High-Level Summary

The House of Lords considered the introduction of Jonathan Robert, Lord Bishop of Rochester, followed by questions on artificial-intelligence small and medium-sized enterprises, the Gwyndod nuclear project, online-safety platform categorisation, Sudan and the Rosebank oil field. A debate on mediation, conflict prevention and peacebuilding covered the relationship between diplomacy, defence, local peacebuilding and multilateral institutions; the Motion was agreed. Members then debated refugee community sponsorship and Personal Independence Payment and other disability benefits, with the Government outlining implementation arrangements and forthcoming reviews. Two delegated instruments were approved before the House adjourned at 5.32 pm.

Detailed Summary

Introduction of the Lord Bishop of Rochester

Jonathan Robert, Lord Bishop of Rochester, was introduced, took the oath, was supported by the Bishops of Winchester and Gloucester, and signed an undertaking to abide by the Code of Conduct. The transcript records that he “was introduced and took the oath”.

Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: AI sector

Lord Ranger of Northwood asked about business confidence among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the artificial-intelligence sector and the Government’s measures to encourage investment. Lord Leong cited the 2024 AI sector study, which found that SMEs made up 96% of UK artificial-intelligence firms and that nearly 90% of surveyed firms expected revenue growth within a year. He referred to the sovereign artificial-intelligence fund, free computing through the AI Research Resource, Innovate UK’s £130 million Growth Catalyst and a £100 million research-and-development procurement scheme. Lord Ranger questioned whether support, including the £30 million local adoption programme beginning in Yorkshire, could create a two-tier economy. Lord Leong said the wider package included £700 million in artificial-intelligence investment, the £30 million partnerships and a £60 million AI Pathway Fund, stating that “These initiatives will help businesses overcome adoption barriers”.

Further questions from Lord Clement-Jones, Lord Walney, Baroness Nargund, Lord Sharpe of Epsom, Lord Fox, Lord Patel and Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate covered procurement for British SMEs, open-source frameworks, women’s access to skills and finance, energy costs, management expertise, computing capacity and university involvement. Lord Leong referred to British Business Bank capacity, support for women founders, training for 10 million young people—2.2 million of whom had completed programmes—and investment in supercomputing. No further decision or division is recorded in the transcript.

Gwyndod Project and civil nuclear employment in Wales

Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist asked about the impact of the Gwyndod small modular reactor project on civil nuclear employment in Wales. Baroness Curran said Great British Energy-Nuclear and Rolls-Royce SMR were undertaking design work for the project on Anglesey and that it could support up to 3,000 skilled on-site jobs at peak construction, with thousands more in the supply chain: “will support up to 3,000 skilled jobs on site at peak construction”.

Questions from Lord Patel, Lord Foulkes of Cumnock, Earl Russell, Lord Gove, Baroness Smith of Llanfaes and Lord Forbes of Newcastle addressed transport infrastructure, reactor-based medical-isotope production, nuclear development in Scotland, implementation of the Fingleton review, local recruitment and skills. The Minister said the Government would work with the Welsh Government on transport, would communicate the isotope-production proposal to relevant departments and had committed to implementing the 47 recommendations of the Fingleton review. She referred to nuclear skills hubs, apprenticeships, graduate programmes and technical careers, while not guaranteeing particular recruitment outcomes: “the principle of local employment, ensuring local communities benefit from infrastructure development, is at the centre of what we do”. No division is recorded in the transcript.

Online Safety Act 2023: platform categorisation

Baroness Morgan of Cotes asked why Ofcom’s register contained no Category 1 service categorised by risk or functionality alone, and raised concerns about smaller platforms hosting high-harm content. Baroness Lloyd of Effra said the February 2025 regulations combined user numbers and functionality, with Category 1 intended for services with at least 7 million monthly UK users. She said smaller services remained subject to duties concerning illegal content and harm to children. The Government had not found a workable condition for categorising small but risky services, while Ofcom’s Small but Risky Services Taskforce had engaged with 14 services, some of which had geo-blocked the UK. The Government would keep the Act’s effectiveness under review: “the Government keep the effectiveness of the Online Safety Act under review”.

Viscount Colville of Culross, Baroness Parminter, Lord Watts, Earl of Effingham, the Bishop of Gloucester, Lord Clement-Jones and Baroness Finlay of Llandaff raised questions about risk assessments, suicide, self-harm, eating-disorder, antisemitic and misogynistic content, enforcement and internet-connected toys aimed at children. The Minister backed robust enforcement, referred to Sir Ian Cheshire’s review of Ofcom’s enforcement capabilities, said the categorisation duties were intended to come into force in 2027 and offered to write to Baroness Finlay. No fixed date for reviewing the categorisation thresholds was given, and no division is recorded.

Sudan: aerial bombardment

Lord Alton of Liverpool asked about recent aerial bombardments in Sudan. Lord Wood of Anfield said that increasing aerial warfare, including drone use, was causing severe harm to civilians and infrastructure, had killed more than 1,000 civilians in the first half of the year and was increasing the risk of famine. He said the United Kingdom was urging the warring parties to protect civilians, comply with international humanitarian law and facilitate humanitarian access: “The UK, both publicly and in our diplomatic engagements, is urging the warring parties to protect civilians”.

Lord Purvis of Tweed, Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick, Lord Bellingham, Baroness Chapman of Darlington and the Bishop of Winchester asked about alleged chemical-weapons use, accountability, external support to the parties, humanitarian assistance and freedom of religion. Lord Wood said the UK had raised allegations with the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, was working with the United States and others to strengthen the UN arms embargo on Darfur, had announced sanctions on suspected perpetrators of sexual violence and other atrocities, and was providing £146 million a year in humanitarian support. He did not comment publicly on reports about a UK preference for a United Nations Secretary-General candidate. No division is recorded in the transcript.

Rosebank oil field

Lord Moynihan asked about the inclusion of Rosebank in the Office for Budget Responsibility’s economic and fiscal outlook. Baroness Curran said the OBR used North Sea Transition Authority projections that included potential future fields and that Rosebank had been included since at least 2019. She stressed that this did not indicate the Energy Secretary’s decision, which would be made through a quasi-judicial process: “This in no way reflects the Energy Secretary’s independent decision on the project”.

Lord Foulkes of Cumnock, Earl Russell, Lord Harper, Lord Deben, Lord Carlile of Berriew, Lord Bridges of Headley, Baroness Hayman, Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle, Lord Vaux of Harrowden and Lord Lilley questioned the potential tax receipts, energy security, exports, scope 3 emissions, climate change, environmental risks and fiscal headroom. Baroness Curran said the OBR would have to republish figures if Rosebank did not proceed, but that it had not provided a pounds-and-pence forecast for the field. She repeatedly declined to comment on the merits of the project, said the Energy Secretary had not made the decision and stressed that “all the factors will be—and must be—taken into account”. No decision on consent was announced and no division is recorded.

Mediation, conflict prevention and peacebuilding

Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale moved that the House take note of the global impact of mediation and conflict prevention and the United Kingdom’s role in peacebuilding. He cited high levels of conflict, displacement and humanitarian need, a reduction in UK conflict-prevention spending from £296 million in 2017 to £118 million in 2023, and the need for a refreshed strategy, sustained funding, support for local peacebuilders, stronger coalitions and technology for peace. He argued that the UK should combine hard and soft power: “We need to not make this a choice between hard and soft power; we need to use smart power”.

Lord Redwood emphasised deterrence and expeditionary capability; the Bishop of Chelmsford called for a strategic peacebuilding review alongside the strategic defence review; Lord Campbell-Savours advocated a negotiated settlement involving Russia and Ukraine; and Lord Bruce of Bennachie questioned whether proposed guarantors could be trusted. Other speakers discussed non-governmental intermediaries, faith leaders, women’s participation, atrocity prevention, Haiti, Sudan, Ukraine and multilateral institutions. Lord Wood of Anfield said the Government’s approach was to bring expertise, build partnerships and strengthen institutions. He referred to co-operation with Qatar, Turkey, Japan and the European Union, more than £200 million contributed to the UN peacebuilding fund since 2006, and a commitment that more than 70% of country and regional aid would go to fragile and conflict-affected states by 2028-29. He also confirmed that a freedom-of-religion-or-belief progress report would be presented to the Prime Minister before the end of the year, summarising the Government’s role as follows: “Our role is to bring expertise, build partnerships and strengthen institutions”. The Motion was agreed.

Refugees: community sponsorship

The Bishop of Chelmsford asked how many refugees would be settled annually through community sponsorship and what support sponsors would receive. Lord Khan of Burnley supported expansion and argued that the initial expectation of arrivals in the low hundreds should be a baseline rather than a ceiling. Baroness Monckton of Dallington Forest and Baroness Brinton raised the effect of reduced payments to Homes for Ukraine hosts and pressures on local authorities. Lord German argued that the proposed numbers were too low and that responsibilities should not be shifted from the state to volunteers, while Lord Davies of Gower sought clarity on annual caps, costs, local-authority involvement and sponsor vetting.

Lord Collins of Highbury said applications had opened for lead sponsors under the named community sponsorship and refugee study routes. He said arrivals under those routes were expected from autumn 2027, while the refugee work route was expected to open in spring 2027, with first arrivals later that year. The Government expected numbers to begin in the hundreds and grow into the low thousands as irregular migration fell; annual caps would reflect community capacity and willingness, with participation voluntary. Accredited lead sponsors would support community groups, universities and employers, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees would confirm that individuals were refugees before travel. The Home Office had published guidance on roles and responsibilities and would provide training and support: “The Home Office today published guidance outlining roles and responsibilities”. Lord Collins also confirmed that Homes for Ukraine thank-you payments would be £100 per month per household and that the per-person tariff would fall from £5,900 to £3,300 for claims made after 1 January 2027. No formal decision or division is recorded.

Arrangement of Business

Baroness Ramsey of Wall Heath announced a change to the timing of the next debate because of an error on the Order Paper. She said that Lord Palmer of Childs Hill and Baroness Spielman each had 12 minutes and asked Members to keep to time so that the scheduled speakers and Minister could respond: “there has been a slight change of timing for the next debate”.

Personal Independence Payment and disability benefits

Baroness Jenkin of Kennington moved that the House take note of the implementation and impact of Personal Independence Payment (PIP), other disability benefits and linked schemes. Speakers debated the growth and cost of PIP, assessment accuracy, fraud, reassessments, mental-health conditions, employment incentives and whether support should be cash-based or linked more directly to services and extra costs. Baroness Jenkin and several speakers argued that the system could discourage work and required tighter, more consistent assessment. Lord Davies of Brixton and Lord Palmer of Childs Hill stressed that PIP supports additional disability costs, including for people in work, and warned against unnecessary reassessment. Lord Willetts argued for evidence-based reform, while Lord Young of Cookham contrasted the claimant-focused Timms review with the participation and expenditure concerns of the Milburn review.

Baroness Dacres of Lewisham, making her first ministerial speech in the Chamber, said that the Government aimed to prevent long-term economic inactivity, protect people unable to work and maintain financial sustainability. She reported that the average PIP journey had fallen from 26 weeks in August 2021 to 18 weeks by July 2026, and said face-to-face delivery would increase by 30%; by July 2026, face-to-face assessments accounted for 14.6% of PIP consultations and 23% of Work Capability Assessment consultations. She said that the final Timms recommendations would be published by the end of the year: “These are not the final recommendations—as we know, those will be published by the end of the year”. The Government were considering ways to expedite delayed reassessments, would promote the ‘right to try’ provisions and planned a new code of practice on claims-management activity. The Motion was agreed.

Delegated legislation and adjournment

Lord Katz moved approval of the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) (Payment of Claims) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations 2026, which had been considered in Grand Committee on 28 October. The Motion was agreed: “Motions agreed”. He also moved approval of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order 2026; the relevant document was the first report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights and the Order had likewise been considered in Grand Committee on 28 October. The Motion was agreed: “Motion agreed”. The House then adjourned at 5.32 pm.