Information between 17th April 2026 - 27th May 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 |
|---|
|
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 174 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 259 Noes - 180 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 173 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 169 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 169 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 284 Noes - 158 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 143 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 162 Noes - 151 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 143 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 211 Noes - 150 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 145 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 216 Noes - 148 |
|
20 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 142 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 219 Noes - 144 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 138 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 220 Noes - 143 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 125 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 197 Noes - 144 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott 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 - 209 Noes - 145 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 138 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 152 Noes - 207 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 126 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 208 Noes - 138 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 129 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 207 Noes - 141 |
|
23 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 131 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 199 Noes - 146 |
|
27 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 152 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 210 Noes - 145 |
|
27 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 155 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 217 Noes - 145 |
|
27 Apr 2026 - English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 148 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 199 Noes - 144 |
|
27 Apr 2026 - Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott 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 - 316 Noes - 165 |
|
27 Apr 2026 - Pension Schemes Bill - View Vote Context Lord Mott voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 143 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 197 Noes - 129 |
| Speeches |
|---|
|
Lord Mott speeches from: King’s Speech
Lord Mott contributed 1 speech (711 words) Wednesday 20th May 2026 - Lords Chamber Department for Transport |
| Written Answers | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Childbirth
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 19th May 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 23 March (HL15674), on the basis of what data they conclude "the vast majority of births in England are safe" when the Care Quality Commission have previously identified two-thirds of England’s maternity units as substandard. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) Data from the Office of National Statistics, Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the UK, and Imperial College London show that death and serious harm in maternity care are relatively rare. Data from the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit’s national survey of maternal health and wellbeing shows that 84% of women reported satisfaction with their care during pregnancy, labour, and childbirth. However, we are not complacent and know we must continue to drive improvement. Baroness Amos’ independent investigation into maternity and neonatal care will help us understand the systemic issues behind why so many women, babies, and families experience unacceptable care. Her final report, including one coherent single set of national recommendations, will be published in June. We have also launched the Maternity and Neonatal Taskforce, which will address the investigation’s final recommendations, tackling the recurrent systemic issues identified in the interim report, and hold the system to account for improving outcomes and experiences for women, babies and families, and staff experiences. |
||||||||||||
|
Infant Mortality and Maternal Mortality
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 19th May 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government what new actions, not already in place prior to the establishment of the Maternity and Neonatal Investigation led by Baroness Amos, are being taken to reduce maternal deaths, stillbirths and neonatal mortality. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) The Government has implemented several initiatives since June 2025 aimed at reducing maternal deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal mortality. In December 2025, we introduced a new early warning system to monitor the rates of term stillbirth, neonatal death, and brain injury. It will immediately flag unusually high rates to prompt a rapid review of any safety concerns. In January 2026, we rolled out the Maternal Care Bundle which provides guidance to tackle the leading causes of maternal death including thrombosis, mental health, epilepsy, and haemorrhage. We have also introduced the Maternity and Neonatal Improvement Support Team as a new national improvement offer providing intensive dedicated support to struggling trusts, to replace the Maternity Safety Support Programme which ended on 31 December 2025. |
||||||||||||
|
Accident and Emergency Departments: Standards
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 21st May 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government, in each of the last five years, how many patients waited in A&E for more than (1) 24 hours, (2) 48 hours, (3) 72 hours and (4) 96 hours from decision to admit to admission; and which month had the largest number of patients waiting in A&E more than 12 hours from decision to admit to admission. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) The information requested regarding how many patients waited in accident and emergency for more than 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, and 96 hours from decision to admit to admission is not available.
The number of patients waiting over 12 hours from the decision to admit is published as part of the monthly national timeseries. The following table shows the month in each of the last five financial years with the highest number of 12 hour waits from decision to admit to admission:
|
||||||||||||
|
Accident and Emergency Departments: Standards
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 21st May 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask His Majesty's Government how many patients waiting more than four hours in A&E from decision to admit to admission subsequently self-discharged before admission, in each of the last five years. Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) Information on the number of patients who waited more than four hours from a decision to admit to admission and subsequently self-discharged before admission is not held centrally. |
||||||||||||
|
Russia: Sanctions
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 27th May 2026 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the adequacy of the sanctions against the Russian regime to prevent investment in non-sanctioned companies indebted to sanctioned Russian banks. Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development) Together with our international partners, we have already imposed on Russia the largest and most severe package of sanctions ever imposed on a major economy, but we continue to keep our sanctions regimes, measures and effectiveness under constant review and adapt them to respond to evolving risks. UK financial sanctions prohibit making funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to designated persons, including sanctioned Russian banks, and prohibit circumvention of these measures. All UK entities are required to comply, supported by robust enforcement across government, but it is our long-standing policy not to comment on individual companies or investments. |
||||||||||||
|
Russia: Sanctions
Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 27th May 2026 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask His Majesty's Government what steps are being taken to ensure any UK-based investments to Eurasian Resources Group do not directly or indirectly benefit any sanctioned Russian entities. Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development) Together with our international partners, we have already imposed on Russia the largest and most severe package of sanctions ever imposed on a major economy, but we continue to keep our sanctions regimes, measures and effectiveness under constant review and adapt them to respond to evolving risks. UK financial sanctions prohibit making funds or economic resources available, directly or indirectly, to designated persons, including sanctioned Russian banks, and prohibit circumvention of these measures. All UK entities are required to comply, supported by robust enforcement across government, but it is our long-standing policy not to comment on individual companies or investments. |
| Live Transcript |
|---|
|
Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm. |
|
20 May 2026, 9:50 p.m. - House of Lords "Lord Mott spoke about cancers and about. And about maternity services. And. My noble friend Baroness " Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill, Minister of State (Department for Transport) (Labour) - View Video - View Transcript |
|
20 May 2026, 9:28 p.m. - House of Lords "focussed on prevention as well. In his contribution, and Lord Mott highlighted the need for screening " Baroness Pidgeon (Liberal Democrat) - View Video - View Transcript |
| Parliamentary Debates |
|---|
|
King’s Speech
102 speeches (43,089 words) Wednesday 20th May 2026 - Lords Chamber Department for Transport Mentions: 1: Baroness Pidgeon (LD - Life peer) The noble Lord, Lord Mott, highlighted the need for prostate cancer screening as a way of prevention. - Link to Speech 2: Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill (Lab - Life peer) carefully to everything he said and has committed herself to write to him.Similarly, the noble Lord, Lord Mott - Link to Speech |
| Select Committee Documents |
|---|
|
Wednesday 29th April 2026
Oral Evidence - NHS England, NHS England, and Department for Health and Social Care The role of ambulance services in supporting accident and emergency departments - Public Services Committee Found: Ambulance services and A&E capacity Wednesday 29 April 2026 11 am Watch the meeting Members present: Lord Mott |
|
Wednesday 22nd April 2026
Declarations of interest - Declaration of Members' Interests Public Services Committee Found: Lord Mott No relevant interests to declare. |
|
Wednesday 22nd April 2026
Oral Evidence - The Royal College of Emergency Medicine, Royal College of Paramedics, and Healthwatch England The role of ambulance services in supporting accident and emergency departments - Public Services Committee Found: Chair); Baroness Coffey; Lord Faulkner of Worcester; Baroness Hollins; Lord Mohammed of Tinsley; Lord Mott |
| Calendar |
|---|
|
Wednesday 1st July 2026 11 a.m. Public Services Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Falling Primary School Rolls View calendar - Add to calendar |
|
Wednesday 15th July 2026 11 a.m. Public Services Committee - Private Meeting Subject: Falling Primary School Rolls View calendar - Add to calendar |
| Select Committee Inquiry |
|---|
|
14 May 2026
Falling Primary School Rolls Public Services Committee (Select) Not accepting submissions Falling pupil numbers drive budget pressures for schools, most of whose funding is provided on a per-pupil basis, as facilities and senior staffing costs are relatively static. In 2023/24, 14.7% of local authority-run schools were in debt, up from 7.9% six years earlier. The IfG estimates that empty school places account for almost two-fifths of that rise. This inquiry seeks to understand the causes and impacts of falling primary school rolls, the implication and sufficiency of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill and the work of the Government and education sector in meeting the challenges presented by falling demand for school places. |