Information between 16th July 2026 - 4th October 2026
Note: This sample does not contain the most recent 2 weeks of information. Up to date samples can only be viewed by Subscribers.
Click here to view Subscription options.
| Division Votes |
|---|
|
20 Jul 2026 - Social Housing Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 34 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 38 Noes - 133 |
|
20 Jul 2026 - Social Housing Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 146 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 232 Noes - 146 |
|
20 Jul 2026 - Social Housing Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 145 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 162 Noes - 220 |
|
21 Jul 2026 - Business of the House - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 144 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 173 Noes - 234 |
|
9 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 135 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 138 |
|
9 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 155 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 226 Noes - 162 |
|
9 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 138 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 194 Noes - 138 |
|
9 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 164 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 163 |
|
9 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 128 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 188 Noes - 125 |
|
7 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 163 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 165 |
|
15 Sep 2026 - Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Jenkin of Kennington voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 96 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 258 Noes - 109 |
| Speeches |
|---|
|
Baroness Jenkin of Kennington speeches from: Creative Education Access Bill [HL]
Baroness Jenkin of Kennington contributed 1 speech (713 words) 2nd reading Friday 11th September 2026 - Lords Chamber Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Gender Dysphoria
Asked by: Baroness Jenkin of Kennington (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 21st July 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Statement by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on 26 February (HCWS1369), what steps (1) the Department for Health and Social Care, and (2) NHS England, are taking to ensure that all relevant clinics share data to facilitate the data linkage study. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) NHS England has undertaken further due diligence on the data sources that will underpin the study, and taken time to re-engage with data-sharing organisations, on which the study will be dependent, including refining the study design and data sharing requirement following discussion with adult gender clinics.
We now expect all commissioned adult gender services to collaborate with the study to enable its successful completion.
The Department continues to support NHS England in progressing the study.
No disciplinary action has been taken. |
|
Gender Dysphoria
Asked by: Baroness Jenkin of Kennington (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 21st July 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Statement by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on 26 February (HCWS1369), whether disciplinary action has been taken within the NHS in relation to those clinics which refused to share data. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) NHS England has undertaken further due diligence on the data sources that will underpin the study, and taken time to re-engage with data-sharing organisations, on which the study will be dependent, including refining the study design and data sharing requirement following discussion with adult gender clinics.
We now expect all commissioned adult gender services to collaborate with the study to enable its successful completion.
The Department continues to support NHS England in progressing the study.
No disciplinary action has been taken. |
|
Candidates: Equality
Asked by: Baroness Jenkin of Kennington (Conservative - Life peer) Monday 14th September 2026 Question To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to amend section 104 of the Equality Act 2010 to allow political parties to exclude men from standing in their leadership elections. Answered by Lord Collins of Highbury - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office) Under section 104 of the Equality Act 2010, registered political parties in the UK are permitted to use positive action, including reserved places on shortlists, where proportionate to address the under representation of candidates with certain protected characteristics. Section 104(7) currently provides a specific exception allowing for this to include single-sex shortlists commonly all-women shortlists) if it is proportionate to reduce unequal representation. Political parties can reserve all the places on their shortlist for one sex if this will reduce unequal representation. If a political party had an under-representation of women, there could be a ‘women-only’ shortlist. Positive action is voluntary and political parties cannot be forced to do it. |