Information between 19th October 2024 - 8th December 2024
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 |
---|
4 Nov 2024 - Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 158 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 125 |
4 Nov 2024 - Bank Resolution (Recapitalisation) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 49 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 125 Noes - 155 |
5 Nov 2024 - Crown Estate Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 172 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 193 Noes - 226 |
5 Nov 2024 - Crown Estate Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 166 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 220 Noes - 139 |
6 Nov 2024 - Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 59 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 69 Noes - 124 |
6 Nov 2024 - Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 130 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 142 Noes - 128 |
6 Nov 2024 - Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 86 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 99 Noes - 138 |
20 Nov 2024 - Water (Special Measures) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 172 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 279 Noes - 136 |
20 Nov 2024 - Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill - View Vote Context Earl Howe voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 184 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 210 Noes - 213 |
Speeches |
---|
Earl Howe speeches from: Mental Health Bill [HL]
Earl Howe contributed 1 speech (2,020 words) 2nd reading Monday 25th November 2024 - Lords Chamber Department of Health and Social Care |
Earl Howe speeches from: Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2024
Earl Howe contributed 1 speech (631 words) Monday 21st October 2024 - Lords Chamber Ministry of Justice |
Written Answers |
---|
Blood Transfusions
Asked by: Earl Howe (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary) Thursday 21st November 2024 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the recommendations in the Infected Blood Inquiry report, what assessment they have made of the safety and efficacy of modern plasma-derived therapies. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) The Government is considering Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations, including recommendation 9 that relates to the use of alternatives to plasma-derived medicines. We will provide an update to Parliament on the progress we are making by the end of the year, as the Inquiry recommends. In April 2021, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) reviewed the latest scientific evidence available on the safety of donor plasma from the United Kingdom and was able to lift the ban on its use for immunoglobulin-based medicines; the ban had been in place since the mid-1990s due to concerns about over the potential spread of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob (vCJD) disease. This was followed by a review of and lifting of the ban on albumins, also derived from UK donor plasma. Both immunoglobulin and albumin are critical medicines for the National Health Service, with approximately 17,000 patients in England relying on immunoglobulins each year but these products are in short supply globally. Following the MHRA view that UK plasma is safe, the Department set up the Plasma for Medicines programme to increase our self-sufficiency and to protect vulnerable patients from the risk of global supply shocks. The first UK donor plasma was shipped for manufacture into medicines in August 2024 and these will be available to NHS patients from January 2025. |
Blood Diseases: Health Services
Asked by: Earl Howe (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary) Wednesday 20th November 2024 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government how they intend to implement recommendation 9(e) of the Infected Blood Inquiry report while maintaining consistency with existing NHS England commissioning guidelines, continuing to improve standards of care and quality of life, and promoting confidence in the safety and efficacy of all licensed medicines for people with rare bleeding disorders. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) I recognise that the findings of the inquiry’s final report are deeply shocking, and the Government is committed to acting on the findings of the Infected Blood Inquiry. The Government is considering Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations, and will provide an update to Parliament on the progress we are making to respond to the inquiry’s recommendations by the end of the year, as the inquiry recommends. |
Blood Diseases: Medical Treatments
Asked by: Earl Howe (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary) Wednesday 20th November 2024 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government how they interpret the phrase "where clinically appropriate" in recommendation 9(e) of the Infected Blood Inquiry report, and how this will preserve patient choice and clinical judgement based on the latest clinical evidence. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) I recognise that the findings of the inquiry’s final report are deeply shocking, and the Government is committed to acting on the findings of the Infected Blood Inquiry. The Government is considering Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations, and will provide an update to Parliament on the progress we are making to respond to the inquiry’s recommendations by the end of the year, as the inquiry recommends. |
Drugs: Regulation
Asked by: Earl Howe (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary) Wednesday 20th November 2024 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the implications of the recommendations in the Infected Blood Inquiry report for the MHRA as regulator of medicines in the UK. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) I recognise that the findings of the inquiry’s final report are deeply shocking, and the Government is committed to acting on the findings of the Infected Blood Inquiry. The Government is considering Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations, and will provide an update to Parliament on the progress we are making to respond to the inquiry’s recommendations by the end of the year, as the inquiry recommends. |