Information between 30th June 2025 - 20th July 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 |
---|
30 Jun 2025 - UK-Mauritius Agreement on the Chagos Archipelago - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 162 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 185 Noes - 205 |
1 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 180 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 221 Noes - 196 |
2 Jul 2025 - House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 249 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 280 Noes - 243 |
7 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 168 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 206 Noes - 198 |
7 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 175 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 274 Noes - 154 |
7 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 174 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 213 Noes - 209 |
9 Jul 2025 - House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 251 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 284 Noes - 239 |
9 Jul 2025 - House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 246 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 265 Noes - 247 |
15 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 142 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 214 Noes - 153 |
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 142 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 161 Noes - 191 |
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 148 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 232 Noes - 137 |
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 173 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 267 Noes - 153 |
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 171 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 264 Noes - 158 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 136 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 155 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding 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 - 184 Noes - 123 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 140 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 138 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 134 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 180 Noes - 123 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 197 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 304 Noes - 160 |
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Pidding voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 178 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 150 |
Written Answers |
---|
Government Departments: Procurement
Asked by: Baroness Pidding (Conservative - Life peer) Monday 30th June 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask His Majesty's Government what guidance has been issued to departments regarding the ethical and reputational risks of awarding contracts to companies, including Fujitsu, that are subject to ongoing public inquiries into failures of governance and corporate responsibility. Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Procurement Act 2023 enables and, where appropriate, requires the exclusion of suppliers where they pose particular risks to public procurement. The Cabinet Office has issued substantial guidance for departments, available on Gov.uk. The exclusions regime provides a framework within which contracting authorities must consider a supplier’s recent past behaviour and circumstances (or their presence on the debarment list) to determine whether it should be allowed to compete for or be awarded a public contract.
In January 2024, Fujitsu said it would withdraw from bidding for contracts with new Government customers until the Post Office Horizon inquiry concludes – it would only bid for work with existing Government customers where it already has a contract with them, or where there is an agreed need for Fujitsu’s skills and capabilities.
Fujitsu's bid approach is detailed in correspondence deposited in the Houses of Parliament libraries on 4 March 2024 (DEP2024-0247).
|
Fujitsu: Contracts
Asked by: Baroness Pidding (Conservative - Life peer) Monday 30th June 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have considered placing a moratorium on new contracts with Fujitsu until the public inquiry into the Horizon scandal has concluded. Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Procurement Act 2023 enables and, where appropriate, requires the exclusion of suppliers where they pose particular risks to public procurement. The Cabinet Office has issued substantial guidance for departments, available on Gov.uk. The exclusions regime provides a framework within which contracting authorities must consider a supplier’s recent past behaviour and circumstances (or their presence on the debarment list) to determine whether it should be allowed to compete for or be awarded a public contract.
In January 2024, Fujitsu said it would withdraw from bidding for contracts with new Government customers until the Post Office Horizon inquiry concludes – it would only bid for work with existing Government customers where it already has a contract with them, or where there is an agreed need for Fujitsu’s skills and capabilities.
Fujitsu's bid approach is detailed in correspondence deposited in the Houses of Parliament libraries on 4 March 2024 (DEP2024-0247).
|
Public Sector: Procurement
Asked by: Baroness Pidding (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 1st July 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that companies under investigation by a public inquiry are subject to enhanced scrutiny or restrictions in future public procurement processes. Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Procurement Act 2023 enables and, where appropriate, requires the exclusion of suppliers where they pose particular risks to public procurement. The exclusions regime provides a framework within which contracting authorities must consider a supplier’s recent past behaviour and circumstances (or their presence on the debarment list) to determine whether it should be allowed to compete for or be awarded a public contract. Contracting authorities can take account of any criticism of suppliers in public inquiry findings when considering whether an exclusion ground applies as part of this process.
|
Public Sector: Contracts
Asked by: Baroness Pidding (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 1st July 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have any plans to introduce new safeguards to prevent companies involved in a statutory inquiry from securing public sector contracts. Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Procurement Act 2023 enables and, where appropriate, requires the exclusion of suppliers where they pose particular risks to public procurement. The exclusions regime provides a framework within which contracting authorities must consider a supplier’s recent past behaviour and circumstances (or their presence on the debarment list) to determine whether it should be allowed to compete for or be awarded a public contract. Contracting authorities can take account of any criticism of suppliers in public inquiry findings when considering whether an exclusion ground applies as part of this process.
|