Information between 11th March 2025 - 31st March 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 |
---|
26 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill) - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 187 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 162 |
26 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill) - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 190 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 165 |
26 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill) - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 189 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 172 |
26 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill) - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 187 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 267 Noes - 151 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 127 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 135 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 156 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 232 Noes - 141 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 190 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 271 Noes - 179 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton 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 - 272 Noes - 157 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 190 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 283 Noes - 177 |
18 Mar 2025 - Non-Domestic Rating (Multipliers and Private Schools) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 183 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 255 Noes - 165 |
17 Mar 2025 - Football Governance Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 171 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 229 |
17 Mar 2025 - Football Governance Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 158 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 74 Noes - 339 |
17 Mar 2025 - Football Governance Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 167 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 182 Noes - 237 |
11 Mar 2025 - Football Governance Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 186 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 203 Noes - 257 |
11 Mar 2025 - Football Governance Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 164 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 181 Noes - 234 |
Speeches |
---|
Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton speeches from: Armed Forces Commissioner Bill
Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton contributed 10 speeches (1,520 words) Committee stage Wednesday 19th March 2025 - Grand Committee Ministry of Defence |
Written Answers |
---|
Defence: Software
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 19th March 2025 Question to the Ministry of Defence: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the value of the Defence Gateway in enabling communication with and the work of the active and strategic reserve. Answered by Lord Coaker - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence) The Defence Gateway remains a valued digital portal which enables effective communication, information sharing, and system access to users across the Defence community. Work to address its contracting is underway, due to commercial sensitivities I am unable to disclose further detail at this time. |
Defence: Software
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 19th March 2025 Question to the Ministry of Defence: To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to extend or replace the contract for the Defence Gateway. Answered by Lord Coaker - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence) The Defence Gateway remains a valued digital portal which enables effective communication, information sharing, and system access to users across the Defence community. Work to address its contracting is underway, due to commercial sensitivities I am unable to disclose further detail at this time. |
Armed Forces: Conditions of Employment
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 19th March 2025 Question to the Ministry of Defence: To ask His Majesty's Government what conditions (1) regular members of the British Army, (2) members of the Army Reserve, (3) members of the Regular Reserve, (4) members of the recall reserve, and (5) civilians employed by the Ministry of Defence are subject to under service law; and what conditions immediate family members of each of these groups are subject to under service law. Answered by Lord Coaker - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence) The Armed Forces Act 2006 (AFA 06) sets out the conditions under which different categories of individuals are subject to service law. Section 367 of the Act sets out the conditions for (1) Regular members, (2) members of the Army Reserve and (3) members of the Regular Reserve as follows:
(1) Every member of the regular forces is subject to service law at all times. (2) Every member of the reserve forces is subject to service law while— (a) in permanent service on call-out under any provision of the Reserve Forces Act 1980 (c. 9) or the Reserve Forces Act 1996 (c. 14) or under any other call-out obligation of an officer; (b) in home defence service on call-out under section 22 of the Reserve Forces Act 1980; (c) in full-time service under a commitment entered into under section 24 of the Reserve Forces Act 1996; (d) undertaking any training or duty (whether or not in pursuance of an obligation); or (e) serving on the permanent staff of a reserve force.
Individuals liable to recall (4) are not members of a reserve force under the Act and would only be subject to service law if they were recalled.
Civilians employed by the Ministry of Defence and immediate family members (if they are civilians) (5) would not be subject to service law under the AFA 06. In certain circumstances they could be subject to service discipline under Section 370 of AFA 06 and these circumstances are set out in Schedule 15 of the Act, such as when they are on an HM aircraft in flight or on a HM ship afloat or they are living or staying with someone who is subject to service law outside the UK.
|
Armed Forces Commissioner Bill
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 20th March 2025 Question to the Ministry of Defence: To ask His Majesty's Government what definition they use for "family members" in the Armed Forces Commissioner Bill. Answered by Lord Coaker - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence) The full definition of ‘relevant family members’ for the purposes of this Bill will be included in secondary legislation. This is being done to mirror the approach taken elsewhere in legislation relating to the Armed Forces.
A draft of the definition of ‘relevant family members’ will be shared with Peers as part of Committee Stage in the House of Lords, scheduled for 19, 24 and 26 March 2025. |
Government Departments: Zero Hours Contracts
Asked by: Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 19th March 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask His Majesty's Government which government departments currently employ people on zero-hour contracts. Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The number of (a) civil servants and (b) contractors employed on zero hour contracts is not held centrally by the Cabinet Office.
Zero hours contracts are not the normal practice or a recommended approach within the Civil Service. Departments may use them in very limited circumstances to help meet exceptional or fluctuating demands on the business.
The flexibility offered by zero hours contracts, zero hour arrangements and low hour contracts can benefit both workers and employers, but without proper safeguards this flexibility can become one-sided, with workers bearing all the financial risk. The Government’s Employment Rights Bill will end one-sided flexibility, ensuring that jobs provide a baseline of security and predictability so workers can better plan their lives and finances. We will consult extensively on the implementation of the legislation to ensure it works for workers and employers alike, and anticipate this meaning the majority of reforms will take effect no earlier than 2026. Government understands that adjusting to these new reforms will take time and is committed to ensuring that all stakeholders receive appropriate time to prepare for these changes ahead of their commencement. |
Parliamentary Debates |
---|
Armed Forces Commissioner Bill
75 speeches (16,702 words) Committee stage Monday 24th March 2025 - Grand Committee Ministry of Defence Mentions: 1: Lord Colgrain (Con - Excepted Hereditary) My question was supported by my noble friend Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton; sadly, he is not here today - Link to Speech 2: Baroness Pitkeathley (Lab - Life peer) The noble Lord, Lord Lancaster of Kimbolton, is not here. Is the amendment not moved? - Link to Speech |
Bill Documents |
---|
Mar. 20 2025
HL Bill 63-II Second marshalled list for Grand Committee Armed Forces Commissioner Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Clause 6 LORD LANCASTER OF KIMBOLTON 24_ Clause 6, page 6, line 24, leave out “, except Gibraltar” |
Mar. 17 2025
HL Bill 63-I Marshalled list for Grand Committee Armed Forces Commissioner Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Clause 6 LORD LANCASTER OF KIMBOLTON 24_ Clause 6, page 6, line 24, leave out “, except Gibraltar” |
Mar. 13 2025
HL Bill 63 Running list of amendments – 13 March 2025 Armed Forces Commissioner Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Clause 6 LORD LANCASTER OF KIMBOLTON ★_ Clause 6, page 6, line 24, leave out “, except Gibraltar” |