Information between 12th March 2024 - 7th November 2024
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 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 5 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 249 Noes - 219 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 5 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 263 Noes - 233 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 6 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 226 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 6 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 209 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 6 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 285 Noes - 230 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 8 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 4 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 271 Noes - 228 |
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 5 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 6 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 251 Noes - 214 |
22 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 4 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 240 Noes - 211 |
17 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 3 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 4 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 195 |
17 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 3 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 6 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 245 Noes - 208 |
16 Apr 2024 - Victims and Prisoners Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House One of 3 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 5 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 176 Noes - 197 |
16 Apr 2024 - Victims and Prisoners Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House One of 3 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 5 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 185 Noes - 192 |
16 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 3 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 275 Noes - 218 |
16 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 2 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 6 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 253 Noes - 236 |
16 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 2 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 7 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 266 Noes - 227 |
16 Apr 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House One of 2 Non-affiliated Aye votes vs 8 Non-affiliated No votes Tally: Ayes - 258 Noes - 233 |
5 Nov 2024 - Crown Estate Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 127 Labour No votes vs 1 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 74 Noes - 147 |
5 Nov 2024 - Crown Estate Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 131 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 220 Noes - 139 |
5 Nov 2024 - Crown Estate Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Lord Smith of Finsbury voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 134 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 193 Noes - 226 |
Written Answers |
---|
Aerials: Highlands of Scotland
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer) Thursday 21st March 2024 Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Camrose on 31 January (HL1716), what protection they have included in provision for the Shared Rural Network of telephone masts in the Highland region of Scotland for wild land and areas of natural beauty, and scientific importance and interest. Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology) 4G Mobile coverage already reaches 99% of premises in the UK. The Shared Rural Network is focused on delivering connectivity not just where people live but where they work, travel and visit. In the Highlands and other areas of Scotland, whether you are a farmer wishing to utilise new technology or a visitor to one of the National Parks, digital connectivity is vital. People must be able to build lives, grow families and sustain businesses, otherwise the communities that keep a place’s culture and history alive will simply dwindle.
To minimise the impact on the environment, publicly funded masts will be shared by all four mobile network operators and existing infrastructure will be utilised wherever possible. At each potential location, an individual assessment takes account of a wide range of factors, including complying with strict planning rules for areas of natural beauty making sure we strike the right balance between connectivity and preserving the preciousness of unique landscapes.
The mobile network operators are required to work closely with local communities to ensure concerns are heard through the planning process, and local planning authorities are then responsible for approving applications. |
Aerials: Highlands of Scotland
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer) Thursday 21st March 2024 Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Camrose on 31 January (HL1716), what consultation they have undertaken with Community Councils in the Highland region of Scotland in relation to the siting of proposed telephone masts under the auspices of the Shared Rural Network. Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology) 4G Mobile coverage already reaches 99% of premises in the UK. The Shared Rural Network is focused on delivering connectivity not just where people live but where they work, travel and visit. In the Highlands and other areas of Scotland, whether you are a farmer wishing to utilise new technology or a visitor to one of the National Parks, digital connectivity is vital. People must be able to build lives, grow families and sustain businesses, otherwise the communities that keep a place’s culture and history alive will simply dwindle.
To minimise the impact on the environment, publicly funded masts will be shared by all four mobile network operators and existing infrastructure will be utilised wherever possible. At each potential location, an individual assessment takes account of a wide range of factors, including complying with strict planning rules for areas of natural beauty making sure we strike the right balance between connectivity and preserving the preciousness of unique landscapes.
The mobile network operators are required to work closely with local communities to ensure concerns are heard through the planning process, and local planning authorities are then responsible for approving applications. |
Aerials: Highlands of Scotland
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer) Thursday 21st March 2024 Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Viscount Camrose on 31 January (HL1716), why the choice of geographical coverage for the Shared Rural Network of telephone masts includes areas in the Highland region of Scotland where coverage can reach no house or community. Answered by Viscount Camrose - Shadow Minister (Science, Innovation and Technology) 4G Mobile coverage already reaches 99% of premises in the UK. The Shared Rural Network is focused on delivering connectivity not just where people live but where they work, travel and visit. In the Highlands and other areas of Scotland, whether you are a farmer wishing to utilise new technology or a visitor to one of the National Parks, digital connectivity is vital. People must be able to build lives, grow families and sustain businesses, otherwise the communities that keep a place’s culture and history alive will simply dwindle.
To minimise the impact on the environment, publicly funded masts will be shared by all four mobile network operators and existing infrastructure will be utilised wherever possible. At each potential location, an individual assessment takes account of a wide range of factors, including complying with strict planning rules for areas of natural beauty making sure we strike the right balance between connectivity and preserving the preciousness of unique landscapes.
The mobile network operators are required to work closely with local communities to ensure concerns are heard through the planning process, and local planning authorities are then responsible for approving applications. |
Manuel Guerrero
Asked by: Lord Smith of Finsbury (Labour - Life peer) Thursday 23rd May 2024 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask His Majesty's Government what representations they are making to the government of Qatar to ensure that Manuel Guerrero, a UK citizen, is either released or provided with the HIV medication that he needs. Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon Supporting the welfare of British nationals detained overseas is a priority for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). The FCDO cannot interfere in the judicial affairs of other countries, however where there are concerns that an individual's welfare needs are not being met, with their consent, we will raise this with the relevant authorities. We are unable to provide comment on the detail of individual consular cases in line with relevant UK data protection legislation. [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-development-office/about/personal-information-charter] |