Lord Cromwell Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for Lord Cromwell

Information between 12th March 2026 - 11th April 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
16 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 24 Crossbench No votes vs 5 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 201 Noes - 177
16 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 19 Crossbench No votes vs 5 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 198 Noes - 171
16 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 25 Crossbench Aye votes vs 9 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 165
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and in line with the House
One of 16 Crossbench No votes vs 7 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 68 Noes - 163
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and in line with the House
One of 20 Crossbench No votes vs 8 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 119 Noes - 191
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 45 Crossbench Aye votes vs 1 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 203 Noes - 148
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 20 Crossbench No votes vs 24 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 231 Noes - 188
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 25 Crossbench No votes vs 19 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 225 Noes - 189
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 29 Crossbench No votes vs 12 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 220 Noes - 191
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 21 Crossbench Aye votes vs 6 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 180 Noes - 58
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 11 Crossbench No votes vs 0 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 83 Noes - 64
18 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and against the House
One of 12 Crossbench Aye votes vs 0 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 69 Noes - 83
23 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and in line with the House
One of 9 Crossbench No votes vs 12 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 77 Noes - 161
23 Mar 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and against the House
One of 34 Crossbench Aye votes vs 2 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 225
24 Mar 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 31 Crossbench Aye votes vs 7 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 285 Noes - 156
25 Mar 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted Aye and in line with the House
One of 53 Crossbench Aye votes vs 4 Crossbench No votes
Tally: Ayes - 306 Noes - 145
26 Mar 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and in line with the House
One of 14 Crossbench No votes vs 5 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 115 Noes - 197
26 Mar 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and in line with the House
One of 11 Crossbench No votes vs 7 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 64 Noes - 140
26 Mar 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Cromwell voted No and against the House
One of 13 Crossbench No votes vs 4 Crossbench Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 171 Noes - 146


Speeches
Lord Cromwell speeches from: Trail-hunting
Lord Cromwell contributed 1 speech (113 words)
Wednesday 18th March 2026 - Lords Chamber
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Lord Cromwell speeches from: Fujitsu: Post Office Horizon Case
Lord Cromwell contributed 1 speech (29 words)
Tuesday 17th March 2026 - Lords Chamber


Written Answers
Financial Ombudsman Service
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have, pending implementation of the review of the Financial Ombudsman Service, to issue interim guidance for cases where Financial Ombudsman Service decisions raise questions about the interpretation of regulatory responsibilities across the financial services sector; or to encourage the Financial Conduct Authority to do so.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

On Monday 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), confirming that the government will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the FCA and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this had led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator. The Government’s reforms will ensure that FOS determinations are fully aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA.

The Government will bring forward legislation to deliver the reforms when parliamentary time allows. Alongside the Government’s response, the FCA and the FOS published a paper seeking views on a number of changes they can make in advance of legislation, including updates to the fair and reasonable test and initial implementation of the new referral mechanism.

The reforms will improve cooperation between the FOS and the FCA, including through introducing a referral mechanism, which will require the FOS to seek a view from the FCA where the FOS considers there may be ambiguity in what FCA rules require, or where it considers an issue raised may have wider implications across the financial services industry, which the FCA will be required to respond to. The FOS and the FCA have implemented an initial version of this mechanism through their updated Memorandum of Understanding.

The reforms will also require the FCA and the FOS to publish regular thematic reports, which will explain the FOS’s approach to types of complaints that it receives. This will provide greater certainty on the approach used by the FOS to resolve disputes, and which demonstrates how that approach is aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA. In their joint paper, the FOS and the FCA set out that they will work with the Government to consider how greater clarity could be provided ahead of any legislative change.

Financial Conduct Authority
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the respective regulatory responsibilities are clearly defined between investment platforms, independent financial advisers and Self-Invested Personal Pension operators under Financial Conduct Authority rules.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

The Government recently carried out a review of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), and consulted on proposed changes to the statutory framework in which it operates. On 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the FOS, confirming it will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the FCA.

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator.

The Government’s reforms will amend the ‘Fair and Reasonable’ test to require that, where firms have met their obligations under relevant FCA Rules, the FOS will be required to find that a firm has acted fairly and reasonably. They will also make clear that the FOS can only consider rules that were in force at the time of the act or omission giving rise to a complaint. These reforms require primary legislation, which the government will take forward when Parliamentary time allows.

Alongside the Government’s planned legislative changes, the FCA and FOS are currently consulting on changes to the Dispute Resolution (DISP) rules in the FCA’s Handbook, which also proposes changes to address industry concerns about the potential for retrospective interpretation of FCA rules and standards.

All FCA authorised firms are subject to the same core regulatory requirements. The FCA communicates to firms, for example through their “Approach to Supervision” publication, that different business models including investment platforms and SIPP providers create different risk and therefore there are different expectations of the firms. The FCA expects firms to understand these risks and mitigate against them. Where appropriate, the FCA will clarify their expectations of different firms. Firms must also meet additional requirements, either rules or guidance, set out by the FCA depending on the specific regulated activities and permissions a firm undertakes and holds.

Financial Ombudsman Service
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that the Financial Ombudsman Service fully utilises established consultation mechanisms, including the Wider Implications Framework between the Financial Ombudsman Service and the Financial Conduct Authority in cases with potential market-wide impact.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

On Monday 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), confirming that the government will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the FCA and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this had led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator. The Government’s reforms will ensure that FOS determinations are fully aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA.

The Government will bring forward legislation to deliver the reforms when parliamentary time allows. Alongside the Government’s response, the FCA and the FOS published a paper seeking views on a number of changes they can make in advance of legislation, including updates to the fair and reasonable test and initial implementation of the new referral mechanism.

The reforms will improve cooperation between the FOS and the FCA, including through introducing a referral mechanism, which will require the FOS to seek a view from the FCA where the FOS considers there may be ambiguity in what FCA rules require, or where it considers an issue raised may have wider implications across the financial services industry, which the FCA will be required to respond to. The FOS and the FCA have implemented an initial version of this mechanism through their updated Memorandum of Understanding.

The reforms will also require the FCA and the FOS to publish regular thematic reports, which will explain the FOS’s approach to types of complaints that it receives. This will provide greater certainty on the approach used by the FOS to resolve disputes, and which demonstrates how that approach is aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA. In their joint paper, the FOS and the FCA set out that they will work with the Government to consider how greater clarity could be provided ahead of any legislative change.

Financial Ombudsman Service
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government, following the publication of their response to the review of the Financial Ombudsman Service, when they intend to (1) implement these reforms, and (2) introduce the necessary primary legislation.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

On Monday 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), confirming that the government will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the FCA and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this had led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator. The Government’s reforms will ensure that FOS determinations are fully aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA.

The Government will bring forward legislation to deliver the reforms when parliamentary time allows. Alongside the Government’s response, the FCA and the FOS published a paper seeking views on a number of changes they can make in advance of legislation, including updates to the fair and reasonable test and initial implementation of the new referral mechanism.

The reforms will improve cooperation between the FOS and the FCA, including through introducing a referral mechanism, which will require the FOS to seek a view from the FCA where the FOS considers there may be ambiguity in what FCA rules require, or where it considers an issue raised may have wider implications across the financial services industry, which the FCA will be required to respond to. The FOS and the FCA have implemented an initial version of this mechanism through their updated Memorandum of Understanding.

The reforms will also require the FCA and the FOS to publish regular thematic reports, which will explain the FOS’s approach to types of complaints that it receives. This will provide greater certainty on the approach used by the FOS to resolve disputes, and which demonstrates how that approach is aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA. In their joint paper, the FOS and the FCA set out that they will work with the Government to consider how greater clarity could be provided ahead of any legislative change.

Financial Ombudsman Service
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the Financial Ombudsman Service's ability to set precedents that create new rules and thereby bypass the Financial Conduct Authority and established regulatory processes.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

On Monday 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), confirming that the government will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the FCA and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this had led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator. The Government’s reforms will ensure that FOS determinations are fully aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA.

The Government will bring forward legislation to deliver the reforms when parliamentary time allows. Alongside the Government’s response, the FCA and the FOS published a paper seeking views on a number of changes they can make in advance of legislation, including updates to the fair and reasonable test and initial implementation of the new referral mechanism.

The reforms will improve cooperation between the FOS and the FCA, including through introducing a referral mechanism, which will require the FOS to seek a view from the FCA where the FOS considers there may be ambiguity in what FCA rules require, or where it considers an issue raised may have wider implications across the financial services industry, which the FCA will be required to respond to. The FOS and the FCA have implemented an initial version of this mechanism through their updated Memorandum of Understanding.

The reforms will also require the FCA and the FOS to publish regular thematic reports, which will explain the FOS’s approach to types of complaints that it receives. This will provide greater certainty on the approach used by the FOS to resolve disputes, and which demonstrates how that approach is aligned with the regulatory standards set by the FCA. In their joint paper, the FOS and the FCA set out that they will work with the Government to consider how greater clarity could be provided ahead of any legislative change.

Financial Ombudsman Service
Asked by: Lord Cromwell (Crossbench - Excepted Hereditary)
Thursday 9th April 2026

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that Financial Ombudsman Service determinations do not impose new regulatory expectations on firms operating investment platforms or providing custody and administration services for Self-Invested Personal Pensions outside the Financial Conduct Authority framework; and what safeguards are in place to ensure that the Financial Ombudsman Service does not apply rules, standards or guidance retrospectively in its determinations.

Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury)

The Government recently carried out a review of the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS), and consulted on proposed changes to the statutory framework in which it operates. On 16 March, the Government published a response to its consultation on reforming the FOS, confirming it will legislate to stop the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator and provide greater regulatory coherence with the FCA.

The FOS was not intended to create binding precedents or new rules through its determinations, which are made based on all the individual circumstances of the case. The Government’s review concluded that there was not always coherence between the regulatory approach set by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the approach used by the FOS in determining individual complaints and, in a small but significant minority of cases, this led to the FOS acting as a quasi-regulator.

The Government’s reforms will amend the ‘Fair and Reasonable’ test to require that, where firms have met their obligations under relevant FCA Rules, the FOS will be required to find that a firm has acted fairly and reasonably. They will also make clear that the FOS can only consider rules that were in force at the time of the act or omission giving rise to a complaint. These reforms require primary legislation, which the government will take forward when Parliamentary time allows.

Alongside the Government’s planned legislative changes, the FCA and FOS are currently consulting on changes to the Dispute Resolution (DISP) rules in the FCA’s Handbook, which also proposes changes to address industry concerns about the potential for retrospective interpretation of FCA rules and standards.

All FCA authorised firms are subject to the same core regulatory requirements. The FCA communicates to firms, for example through their “Approach to Supervision” publication, that different business models including investment platforms and SIPP providers create different risk and therefore there are different expectations of the firms. The FCA expects firms to understand these risks and mitigate against them. Where appropriate, the FCA will clarify their expectations of different firms. Firms must also meet additional requirements, either rules or guidance, set out by the FCA depending on the specific regulated activities and permissions a firm undertakes and holds.




Lord Cromwell - Select Committee Information

Calendar
Thursday 16th July 2026 9 a.m.
Audit and Risk Assurance Committee (Lords) - Private Meeting
View calendar - Add to calendar