To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.


Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 88 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 16 Noes - 92
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 140 Labour No votes vs 1 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 231 Noes - 147
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 156 Labour No votes vs 1 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 255 Noes - 183
Division Vote (Lords)
28 Jan 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab) voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 151 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 67 Noes - 191
Written Question
Integrated Care Boards: Standards
Monday 26th January 2026

Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 5 January (HL13176), what safeguards they plan to put in place to ensure that integrated care boards are subject to proper scrutiny, particularly in relation to the incorporation of patient engagement work into the commissioning of services.

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

Integrated care boards currently have a statutory duty in relation to public involvement and consultation and are subject to an annual assessment by NHS England of their functions.

The abolition of Healthwatch England and Local HealthWatch arrangements will require primary legislation and is subject to the will of Parliament.




Written Question
Medical Treatments: Cost Effectiveness
Monday 26th January 2026

Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of adjusting the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness thresholds for highly specialised technology in line with the new single technology appraisal cost-effectiveness thresholds due to come into effect from April.

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

We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.

The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.

There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.


Written Question
Drugs: Rare Diseases
Monday 26th January 2026

Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of increasing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence highly specialised technology cost-effectiveness threshold on patient access to rare disease medicines.

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

We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.

The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.

There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.


Written Question
Drugs: Cost Effectiveness
Monday 26th January 2026

Asked by: Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Labour - Life peer)

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what their rationale is for increasing the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) cost-effectiveness thresholds for assessing new medicines to £25–30,000 per quality-adjusted life year; and whether they plan to apply the same proportionate increases to the NICE cost-effectiveness thresholds for highly specialised technologies.

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

We have reached a landmark agreement with the United States of America that secures a preferential tariff rate of 0% for all pharmaceuticals exports to the US for at least three years, and preferential terms for the United Kingdom’s medical technology exports, meaning no additional new tariffs on medical technology. This means that, unlike anywhere else in the world, life sciences companies exporting medicines from the UK to the US will face no tariffs to do so, protecting jobs and investment in the UK.

The agreement will see the National Health Service invest approximately 25% more in innovative treatments which will be achieved through an increase to the standard cost-effectiveness threshold that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) uses and a change to the way in which NICE values health benefits to better reflect societal preferences.

There are currently no plans to increase the cost‑effectiveness threshold for the highly specialised technologies (HST) programme. The HST programme already operates at a much higher threshold than standard NICE technology appraisals, reflecting the challenges of bringing treatments for very rare conditions to market, and NICE has been able to recommend nearly all the treatments that have been evaluated through the HST programme for NHS use.


Speech in Lords Chamber - Mon 26 Jan 2026
Superintelligent AI

"To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to regulate the development of superintelligent AI...."
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath - View Speech

View all Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Superintelligent AI

Speech in Lords Chamber - Mon 26 Jan 2026
Superintelligent AI

"My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend for that considered Answer. Clearly, AI has great potential; the UK is third in the global league of AI investment. I understand the Government’s response, which is essentially a nuanced approach to encourage both proper regulation and investment.

However, superintelligent AI …..."

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath - View Speech

View all Lord Hunt of Kings Heath (Lab - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Superintelligent AI