Baroness McIntosh of Pickering Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for Baroness McIntosh of Pickering

Information between 5th November 2025 - 25th November 2025

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
5 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 79 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 85 Noes - 169
5 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 147 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 161 Noes - 144
5 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 149 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 157 Noes - 200
5 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 147 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 159 Noes - 194
5 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 47 Conservative No votes vs 3 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 47 Noes - 136
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 179 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 193 Noes - 236
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 181 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 201 Noes - 238
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 185 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 207 Noes - 240
17 Nov 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 198 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 298 Noes - 157
17 Nov 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 199 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 309 Noes - 150
17 Nov 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 195 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 302 Noes - 135
17 Nov 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 198 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 295 Noes - 150
17 Nov 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 193 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 296 Noes - 147
24 Nov 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill - View Vote Context
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 8 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 81 Noes - 132


Speeches
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering speeches from: Water and Sewerage Companies: Statutory Consultees
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering contributed 3 speeches (160 words)
Thursday 20th November 2025 - Lords Chamber
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering speeches from: Prisoner Releases in Error
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering contributed 1 speech (92 words)
Thursday 13th November 2025 - Lords Chamber
Ministry of Justice
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering speeches from: Police: Records
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering contributed 1 speech (44 words)
Tuesday 11th November 2025 - Lords Chamber
Home Office
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering speeches from: Prison Services: Insourcing
Baroness McIntosh of Pickering contributed 1 speech (36 words)
Wednesday 5th November 2025 - Lords Chamber
Ministry of Justice


Written Answers
Compulsory Purchase: Infrastructure
Asked by: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative - Life peer)
Friday 14th November 2025

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government what procedure will be available for those affected by compulsory purchase orders owing to nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) to object following changes to the NSIP regime in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

Development Consent Orders (DCO) for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects may include powers of compulsory acquisition. However, Government guidance related to the procedures for the compulsory acquisition of land continues to expect acquisition by agreement wherever practicable and supports early engagement with affected parties. DCO promoters proposing to seek powers of compulsory acquisition should be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State that all reasonable alternatives to compulsory acquisition (including modifications to the scheme) have been explored. The Secretary of State will only authorise compulsory acquisition in circumstances where it is satisfied that the statutory tests in the Planning Act 2008 are met—including that the land is required for the development, or to facilitate or is incidental to the development, and that there is a compelling case in the public interest for the compulsory acquisition. These matters are rigorously tested during the examination stage of an application.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill does not alter these statutory tests or the requirement to notify those with an interest in land once an application is accepted. The Bill removes the duty to consult persons who have an interest in the land, or able to make a relevant claim for compensation, but retains acceptance notification and full participation rights for affected persons. Updated guidance associated with the pre-application stage of DCO applications will set out expectations for engagement with affected persons during the pre-application stage.

Landowners, including those affected by proposed compulsory acquisition, are treated as an interested party and are still able to submit a relevant representation to provide their formal comments on the application. This also enables them to participate in the examination, make written submissions, attend hearings, and request compulsory acquisition‑specific hearings.

Compulsory Purchase: Infrastructure
Asked by: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative - Life peer)
Friday 14th November 2025

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the remarks by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 30 October (HL Deb col 1496), what protection will be given under the Planning and Infrastructure Bill to those at risk of compulsory purchase of their property owing to developments such as Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects like the expansion at Heathrow Airport.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

Development Consent Orders (DCO) for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects may include powers of compulsory acquisition. However, Government guidance related to the procedures for the compulsory acquisition of land continues to expect acquisition by agreement wherever practicable and supports early engagement with affected parties. DCO promoters proposing to seek powers of compulsory acquisition should be able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State that all reasonable alternatives to compulsory acquisition (including modifications to the scheme) have been explored. The Secretary of State will only authorise compulsory acquisition in circumstances where it is satisfied that the statutory tests in the Planning Act 2008 are met—including that the land is required for the development, or to facilitate or is incidental to the development, and that there is a compelling case in the public interest for the compulsory acquisition. These matters are rigorously tested during the examination stage of an application.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill does not alter these statutory tests or the requirement to notify those with an interest in land once an application is accepted. The Bill removes the duty to consult persons who have an interest in the land, or able to make a relevant claim for compensation, but retains acceptance notification and full participation rights for affected persons. Updated guidance associated with the pre-application stage of DCO applications will set out expectations for engagement with affected persons during the pre-application stage.

Landowners, including those affected by proposed compulsory acquisition, are treated as an interested party and are still able to submit a relevant representation to provide their formal comments on the application. This also enables them to participate in the examination, make written submissions, attend hearings, and request compulsory acquisition‑specific hearings.

Mental Health Services: Rural Areas
Asked by: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative - Life peer)
Tuesday 18th November 2025

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the provision of mental health services for both adults and children in rural areas.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

No national assessment has been made as it is for individual local integrated care boards to decide on the provision of mental health services to meet the needs of adults and children in their rural areas.

Nationally, the Government is committed to creating an environment that promotes good mental health, prevents adults and children from developing mental health problems, and improves the lives of people living with a mental health problem, including those living in rural areas.

The 10-Year Health Plan sets out ambitious plans to transform mental health services to improve access and treatment, and to promote good mental health and wellbeing for the nation. This includes improving assertive outreach, investing in mental health emergency departments and neighbourhood mental health centres, and increasing access to talking therapies and evidence-based digital interventions.

The recently published Medium Term Planning Framework sets targets for integrated care boards to expand coverage of mental health support teams in schools and colleges, expand NHS Talking Therapies and Individual Placement Support schemes, and eliminate inappropriate out-of-area placements by 2029.

Sewers
Asked by: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative - Life peer)
Monday 24th November 2025

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government by which date they expect to implement Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 in England.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

The Government is strongly committed to improving the implementation of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and we are looking at what additional steps might be taken to support this.

Better delivery of SuDS may be achieved by continuing to improve the current planning policy-based approach and looking at ways of improving the approach to adoption and maintenance, rather than commencing schedule 3 to the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.

We intend to consult on national planning policy related to decision making, including policies on flood risk and SuDS. The Government also recognises the importance of long-term maintenance of SuDS. We will be consulting on legislative and policy options to reduce the prevalence of unadopted estates, and the injustices associated with them, including for SuDS.

Fishing Vessels
Asked by: Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Conservative - Life peer)
Monday 24th November 2025

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government what opportunities there are for fishing and increased quotas for under-10-metre fishing vessels under the determination of fishing opportunities for British fishing boats.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Following the annual UK-EU and Coastal State negotiations, the UK secured approximately 747,000 tonnes of quota for 2025, valued at around £956 million. Targeted initiatives have expanded the quota pool available to the under 10 metre (U10) fleet, particularly for stocks that were previously underutilised.

The 350kg annual cap on finfish quota species for English U10 vessels has been removed. The Secretary of State’s Determination sets total UK catch limits for quota stocks, after which allocations, being a devolved matter, are made available. In England, quota for the U10 pool is managed by the Marine Management Organisation (MMO). Licence variations have increased catch limits for certain species, enabling more effective use of quota throughout the year.

By removing restrictive caps and adjusting monthly limits, these measures create significant new opportunities for U10 vessels.




Baroness McIntosh of Pickering mentioned

Live Transcript

Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm.

20 Nov 2025, 11:13 a.m. - House of Lords
">> The Lord Frost oral question Baroness McIntosh of Pickering. >> I beg leave to ask the question, standing in my name on the Order "
Oral questions: Water and sewerage companies as consultees on nationally significant infrastructure projects - View Video - View Transcript
24 Nov 2025, 5:49 p.m. - House of Lords
"one, tabled by my noble friend Baroness McIntosh of Pickering and alongside Baroness Coffey amendment. "
Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Conservative) - View Video - View Transcript
24 Nov 2025, 5:39 p.m. - House of Lords
">> Very briefly, just to support E1 in the name of the noble Baroness McIntosh of Pickering in particularly, I agree with her "
Lord Lansley (Conservative) - View Video - View Transcript
24 Nov 2025, 5:28 p.m. - House of Lords
"these reassurances, the noble Baroness Baroness McIntosh of Pickering will feel able not to "
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour) - View Video - View Transcript
24 Nov 2025, 5:59 p.m. - House of Lords
"be agreed to motion e1 Baroness McIntosh of Pickering. "
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government) (Labour) - View Video - View Transcript