Lord Flight Portrait

Lord Flight

Conservative - Life peer

Became Member: 13th January 2011

Left House: 24th January 2026 (Death)


Lord Flight is not an officer of any APPGs
3 APPG Memberships
Fair Banking, Financial Education for Young People, Mutuals
4 Former APPG Officer Positions
Alternative Lending, Challenger Banks and Building Societies, Channel Islands, Future Financial Services
High Speed Rail (West Midlands - Crewe) Bill Select Committee (Lords)
30th Oct 2019 - 5th Nov 2019
Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee
8th Jun 2015 - 1st Jul 2019
Finance Bill Sub-Committee
10th Jan 2017 - 17th Mar 2017
Deputy Chair, Conservative Party
1st Dec 2004 - 1st Mar 2005
Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury
23rd Jul 2002 - 1st Dec 2004
Social Security
20th Jul 1998 - 26th Jul 1999
Environment, Transport & Regional Affairs
14th Jul 1997 - 20th Jul 1998


Division Voting information

Lord Flight has voted in 812 divisions, and 25 times against the majority of their Party.

6 Oct 2020 - Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 6 Conservative Aye votes vs 196 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 211
15 Jun 2020 - Abortion (Northern Ireland) (No. 2) Regulations 2020 - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 43 Conservative Aye votes vs 125 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 112 Noes - 388
15 Jun 2020 - Abortion (Northern Ireland) (No. 2) Regulations 2020 - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Conservative No votes vs 127 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 355 Noes - 77
17 Jul 2019 - Northern Ireland (Executive Formation) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Conservative Aye votes vs 35 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 39 Noes - 138
27 Feb 2015 - International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 17 Conservative Aye votes vs 18 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 30 Noes - 108
16 Jan 2015 - Assisted Dying Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 37 Conservative No votes vs 41 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 107 Noes - 180
16 Jan 2015 - Assisted Dying Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 19 Conservative No votes vs 24 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 61 Noes - 119
29 Oct 2013 - Care Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 7 Conservative Aye votes vs 114 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 96 Noes - 271
8 Jul 2013 - Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 50 Conservative Aye votes vs 63 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 119 Noes - 314
8 Jul 2013 - Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 50 Conservative Aye votes vs 50 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 103 Noes - 278
8 Jul 2013 - Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 17 Conservative Aye votes vs 35 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 32 Noes - 163
8 Jul 2013 - Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Conservative Aye votes vs 25 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 15 Noes - 84
4 Jun 2013 - Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 65 Conservative Aye votes vs 79 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 390
18 Jun 2012 - Financial Services Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Conservative Aye votes vs 93 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 190 Noes - 186
26 Mar 2012 - Scotland Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Conservative Aye votes vs 65 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 72 Noes - 151
16 Feb 2011 - Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 27 Conservative Aye votes vs 118 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 215
19 Jan 2011 - Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 28 Conservative Aye votes vs 74 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 122
17 Jan 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Conservative Aye votes vs 157 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 261 Noes - 166
17 Jan 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 155 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 238 Noes - 171
17 Jan 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 145 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 236 Noes - 158
17 Jan 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Conservative No votes vs 135 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 163 Noes - 216
7 Feb 2022 - National Insurance Contributions Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 1 Conservative Aye votes vs 164 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 197 Noes - 175
28 Feb 2022 - Nationality and Borders Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 118 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 204 Noes - 126
2 Mar 2022 - Nationality and Borders Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 1 Conservative Aye votes vs 154 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 221 Noes - 172
4 Apr 2022 - Nationality and Borders Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Flight voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 138 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 191 Noes - 148
View All Lord Flight Division Votes

All Debates

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Lord Newby (Liberal Democrat)
(44 debate interactions)
Lord Sassoon (Conservative)
(40 debate interactions)
Lord Freud (Conservative)
(26 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
HM Treasury
(229 debate contributions)
Department for Work and Pensions
(54 debate contributions)
Department of Health and Social Care
(33 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
View all Lord Flight's debates

Lords initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Lord Flight, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.


Lord Flight has not introduced any legislation before Parliament

Lord Flight has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


Latest 18 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
19th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to implement the EU's Insolvency, Restructuring and Second Chance Directive.

The proposed Directive on preventive restructuring frameworks, second chance and insolvency measures is currently still under negotiation in Brussels. Given this stage of the process and the ongoing negotiations on withdrawal from the EU, it is not possible to say whether, if adopted by the EU, the provisions would be implemented in the UK.

Similar proposals to those in the draft Directive were consulted on by the Government in the Review of the Corporate Insolvency Framework consultation published in May 2016. The consultation contained a package of proposals to improve the rescue opportunities for financially-distressed companies. A summary of responses to the consultation was published in September 2016 and the Government will set out the way forward for the proposals in its response later this year.

19th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the case for introducing reforms to the UK's corporate insolvency framework after the UK went from 13th to 14th in the World Bank's ease of doing business rankings in respect of resolving insolvencies.

In May 2016 the Government published its Review of the Corporate Insolvency Framework consultation. The consultation contained a package of proposals to improve the rescue opportunities for financially-distressed companies. A summary of responses to the consultation was published in September 2016.

Following the publication of the summary of responses, the Government has continued to engage with a range of interested parties to further discuss and explore issues raised in responses to the consultation. This further engagement will ensure that any reforms, if necessary, will be fit for purpose and best achieve the Government’s aims of rescuing distressed but viable businesses, preserving economic value and saving jobs.

The Government will set out the way forward for the proposals in its response later this year.

19th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government, in the light of the possible barriers to resolving cross-border insolvencies post-Brexit, what assessment they have made of the case for reforming the UK's corporate insolvency framework to ensure that it is fit for purpose.

The exact future relationship between the EU and UK on civil judicial cooperation, including the recognition of insolvency and restructuring procedures and judgments, is subject to negotiations with our EU partners. It is in the interests of the UK and the EU that there continues to be an effective, and fit for purpose, framework for resolving cross-border legal disputes. The Government has made clear that an effective framework of civil judicial cooperation is an important part of the deep and special partnership we want to establish with the EU.

The Government keeps the UK's corporate insolvency framework under review to ensure it is fit for purpose and in May 2016 published its Review of the Corporate Insolvency Framework consultation. A summary of responses to that consultation was published in September 2016 and the Government will set out the way forward for the proposals in its response later this year.

The Government is currently consulting on a package of insolvency and corporate governance measures to strengthen the responsibilities of directors of companies that are in or approaching insolvency in order to reduce the risk of major company failures and to ensure the UK remains one of the best places to start and grow a business. The consultation is open until 11 June 2018.

29th Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the presence of (1) Armenian armed forces, and (2) other irregular groups, in Nagorno-Karabakh in violation of the clauses of the Trilateral Ceasefire Agreement of 10 November 2020.

Although the UK Government is aware of these reports we have not made an assessment on their reliability. However, the UK Government remains concerned by reports of ceasefire violations in Nagorno-Karabakh and deeply regrets the loss of life caused by exchanges of fire between the parties to the conflict. During his meetings with the Azerbaijani Ambassador on 29 March and the Armenian Ambassador on 31 March, the Minister for Europe and Americas reinforced the urgent need for a diplomatic solution to ongoing tensions in the region to ensure stability and security.

9th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have (1) to make representations to the government of Armenia in relation to sharing data on landmines with the government of Azerbaijan; and (2) to provide support to the government of Azerbaijan in clearing landmines from land regained by that country during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war.

On 14 June the Minister for the European Neighbourhood spoke to Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Bayramov. She welcomed the return of Armenian prisoners of war/detainees by the Azerbaijani Government and the subsequent handover of mine maps by the Armenian Government. We continue to monitor the situation and understand from Azerbaijani government reports that as of 9 June 2021, 27 Azerbaijanis have been killed and over 100 injured by explosive remnants of war. We are deeply concerned by this ongoing loss of civilian life.

The UK Government continues to urge both countries, most recently at the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on 3 June, to work together to ensure that humanitarian organisations have unimpeded access to the region and that de-mining maps are urgently provided to ensure the safety of civilians. Last week the MOD sent Counter Explosives Experts to survey parts of Azerbaijan worst effected by unexplored ordnance to understand how the UK can best support Azerbaijan in this area.

28th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the total value of savings held by bad leavers participating in Save As You Earn schemes, before they exited, in each of the last five years.

The Save As You Earn (SAYE) scheme is a tax-advantaged employee share scheme offered by the Government.

A “bad leaver” from a SAYE scheme is a participant that does not meet the good leaver provisions as defined in the legislation at paragraph 34 of Schedule 3 to the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003.

HMRC collects data at the points at which employees enter or leave SAYE schemes but this does not directly include data on “bad leavers”.

28th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the total value forfeited in share growth as a result of participants in Save As You Earn schemes exiting as bad leavers in each of the last five years.

The Save As You Earn (SAYE) scheme is a tax-advantaged employee share scheme offered by the Government.

A “bad leaver” from a SAYE scheme is a participant that does not meet the good leaver provisions as defined in the legislation at paragraph 34 of Schedule 3 to the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003.

HMRC collects data at the points at which employees enter or leave SAYE schemes but this does not directly include data on “bad leavers”.

28th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the number of bad leavers from Save As You Earn schemes in each of the last five years.

The Save As You Earn (SAYE) scheme is a tax-advantaged employee share scheme offered by the Government.

A “bad leaver” from a SAYE scheme is a participant that does not meet the good leaver provisions as defined in the legislation at paragraph 34 of Schedule 3 to the Income Tax (Earnings and Pensions) Act 2003.

HMRC collects data at the points at which employees enter or leave SAYE schemes but this does not directly include data on “bad leavers”.

17th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what assumptions they made in forecasting expected revenue from the three percentage point stamp duty levy on the purchase of additional homes and homes available for rent.

The key assumptions behind the forecast for expected revenue from the Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) higher rates for additional properties are as set out in the Spending Review and Autumn Statement 2015 and Budget 2016 policy costings. The tax base was estimated by combining price and volumes data from the Council of Mortgage Lenders, Census 2011 and administrative data from SDLT and Council Tax. The tax base was projected to grow over the forecast period in line with the OBR Autumn Statement 2015 forecasts for residential SDLT, residential transactions and average house prices. The costing also accounted for a behavioural response. At Budget 2016 the size of the tax base was re-estimated by the OBR using HM Revenue and Customs administrative data from SDLT returns.
17th Jul 2017
Her Majesty's Government what was (1) the total income raised from the stamp duty levy on additional homes, and (2) the total amount refunded because a purchaser sold their main residence within three years of buying a new one, in 2016-17.

The total income raised from the higher rate of Stamp Duty Land Tax (SDLT) on additional homes for 2016-17 was £1,643m. This is the revenue from the additional 3% element only and therefore excludes the revenue from the main rates of SDLT on these properties.

Statistics on repayments from the higher rate of SDLT on additional properties for 2016-17 are due to be published in July 2017.

26th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have, if any, to remove the requirement for private providers of purpose-built student accommodation who are part of an approved national code to be subject to house in multiple occupation licensing.

The Government consulted on the effectiveness of the code in assuring acceptable management practices and standards as part of our consultation on extending mandatory licensing of HMOs. We acknowledged as part of our response, that a significant number of consultees were satisfied with the code as being a means of ensuring acceptable management practices and standards in student accommodation. However, membership of a code alone does not guarantee that the student accommodation meets local standards set by a local authority and therefore should not necessarily provide an exemption from HMO licensing.

Educational establishments have a duty of care defined by statutory obligations, for example through the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, that they must fulfil, both in the provision of education and accommodation to its students. They are also subject to regulation by an independent regulator, the Office for Students. However, private companies are not subject to the same levels of regulation and therefore should not be exempted from House in Multiple Occupation licensing.

Therefore, the Government does not have plans to remove requirements for private providers of purpose-built student accommodation who are part of an approved national code to be subject to houses in multiple occupation licensing.

26th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government why purpose-built student accommodation provided by universities is exempt from house in multiple occupation licensing while similar accommodation provided by private companies is not.

The Government consulted on the effectiveness of the code in assuring acceptable management practices and standards as part of our consultation on extending mandatory licensing of HMOs. We acknowledged as part of our response, that a significant number of consultees were satisfied with the code as being a means of ensuring acceptable management practices and standards in student accommodation. However, membership of a code alone does not guarantee that the student accommodation meets local standards set by a local authority and therefore should not necessarily provide an exemption from HMO licensing.

Educational establishments have a duty of care defined by statutory obligations, for example through the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, that they must fulfil, both in the provision of education and accommodation to its students. They are also subject to regulation by an independent regulator, the Office for Students. However, private companies are not subject to the same levels of regulation and therefore should not be exempted from House in Multiple Occupation licensing.

Therefore, the Government does not have plans to remove requirements for private providers of purpose-built student accommodation who are part of an approved national code to be subject to houses in multiple occupation licensing.

26th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of the codes for student accommodation in protecting tenants and maintaining property and management standards.

The Government consulted on the effectiveness of the code in assuring acceptable management practices and standards as part of our consultation on extending mandatory licensing of HMOs. We acknowledged as part of our response, that a significant number of consultees were satisfied with the code as being a means of ensuring acceptable management practices and standards in student accommodation. However, membership of a code alone does not guarantee that the student accommodation meets local standards set by a local authority and therefore should not necessarily provide an exemption from HMO licensing.

Educational establishments have a duty of care defined by statutory obligations, for example through the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, that they must fulfil, both in the provision of education and accommodation to its students. They are also subject to regulation by an independent regulator, the Office for Students. However, private companies are not subject to the same levels of regulation and therefore should not be exempted from House in Multiple Occupation licensing.

Therefore, the Government does not have plans to remove requirements for private providers of purpose-built student accommodation who are part of an approved national code to be subject to houses in multiple occupation licensing.

26th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the cost to providers of purpose-built student accommodation of being required to pay for house in multiple occupation licences.

The Government consulted on the effectiveness of the code in assuring acceptable management practices and standards as part of our consultation on extending mandatory licensing of HMOs. We acknowledged as part of our response, that a significant number of consultees were satisfied with the code as being a means of ensuring acceptable management practices and standards in student accommodation. However, membership of a code alone does not guarantee that the student accommodation meets local standards set by a local authority and therefore should not necessarily provide an exemption from HMO licensing.

Educational establishments have a duty of care defined by statutory obligations, for example through the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, that they must fulfil, both in the provision of education and accommodation to its students. They are also subject to regulation by an independent regulator, the Office for Students. However, private companies are not subject to the same levels of regulation and therefore should not be exempted from House in Multiple Occupation licensing.

Therefore, the Government does not have plans to remove requirements for private providers of purpose-built student accommodation who are part of an approved national code to be subject to houses in multiple occupation licensing.

26th Mar 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what are the respective criteria (1) to obtain a licence for a house in multiple occupation, and (2) to join a Government-supported national code for student accommodation.

To obtain a House in Multiple Occupation ( HMO) licence applicants must meet the statutory requirements under the Part 2 of the Housing Act 2004 and any discretionary requirements set by the relevant local authority.

The codes of practice for student accommodation are run by Universities UK/Guild HE and Accreditation Network UK/Unipol. To join one of these codes applicants must meet the requirements of the particular code which includes audits, inspections and verification processes.

19th Dec 2018
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the total (1) cost of running the County Court Bailiffs service, and (2) receipts from licences and permits for High Court Enforcement Officers in each of the last five years for which data is available.

(1)The information requested is not held centrally (2)High Court Enforcement Officers are appointed by the Senior Master of the Queen’s Bench Division at the High Court, to carry out enforcement within certain postal districts. The Ministry of Justice does not receive any money from this appointment process.

Lord Keen of Elie
Shadow Minister (Justice)