Lord Tanlaw

Conservative - Life peer

Became Member: 21st May 1971

Left House: 3rd November 2017 (Retired)


Lord Tanlaw is not a member of any APPGs
Lord Tanlaw has no previous appointments


Division Voting information

Lord Tanlaw has voted in 91 divisions, and 1 time against the majority of their Party.

25 Apr 2016 - Housing and Planning Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Tanlaw voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 1 Conservative Aye votes vs 172 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 253 Noes - 205
View All Lord Tanlaw 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.

Department Debates
Leader of the House
(2 debate contributions)
Department for Transport
(2 debate contributions)
Ministry of Defence
(1 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
Legislation Debates
Lord Tanlaw has not made any spoken contributions to legislative debate
View all Lord Tanlaw's debates

Lords initiatives

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


1 Bill introduced by Lord Tanlaw


To make provision for the devolution of timescales, time zones and the subject-matter of the Summer Time Act 1972.

Lords Completed

Last Event - 3rd Reading: House Of Lords
Tuesday 13th December 2011

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


Latest 8 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
3 Other Department Questions
19th Oct 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the case for the civil timescale Greenwich Mean Time being renamed Greenwich Meridian Time, with a value of UT1 at longitude zero based on GPS rather than the historic location of the prime meridian.

As the reference frame for the Global Positioning System (GPS) is established through a mathematical interpretation of satellite radio signals, rather than a physical meridian, it is not conceptually appropriate to represent it in the same way as other meridians have historically been marked at Greenwich.

We do not see any practical benefit in changing the reference point for UT1 even if it was a decision the UK Government could make unilaterally. Such a change could cause confusion as could use of the term “Greenwich Meridian Time”. In line with the International Telecommunication Union Radio Regulations, all time‑signal broadcasts in the UK transmit. the international timescale UTC, and so any change to UT1 or GMT would have no impact on the time-signal available to the UK public.


Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
19th Oct 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the prime meridian can be correctly identified and correlated with GPS by the construction (with permission) in Greenwich Park of a suitable marker located at zero longitude.

As the reference frame for the Global Positioning System (GPS) is established through a mathematical interpretation of satellite radio signals, rather than a physical meridian, it is not conceptually appropriate to represent it in the same way as other meridians have historically been marked at Greenwich.

We do not see any practical benefit in changing the reference point for UT1 even if it was a decision the UK Government could make unilaterally. Such a change could cause confusion as could use of the term “Greenwich Meridian Time”. In line with the International Telecommunication Union Radio Regulations, all time‑signal broadcasts in the UK transmit. the international timescale UTC, and so any change to UT1 or GMT would have no impact on the time-signal available to the UK public.


Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
8th Dec 2014
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the 1968–71 experiment of continuous British Summer Time (GMT+1) will be repeated to obtain updated statistics in order to select the best clock time for daylight saving during the winter months.

We will not be repeating the 1968-71 experiment of continuous British Summer Time (GMT+1), as there is no consensus across the whole of the UK for this experiment to take place. There are both negative and positive effects, but until a UK wide consensus is confirmed we have no plans to change the clocks.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
5th Sep 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to identify accurately the GPS Prime Meridian with a corresponding marker at the correct location in Greenwich Park.

As the reference frame for the Global Positioning System (GPS) is established through a mathematical interpretation of satellite radio signals, rather than a physical meridian, it is not conceptually appropriate to represent it in the same way as other meridians have historically been marked at Greenwich.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
5th Sep 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to change the meaning of the acronym GMT from Greenwich Mean Time to Greenwich Meridian Time.

We consider that any attempt to change the meaning of the acronym GMT is likely to result in confusion.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
5th Sep 2016
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to review the use of British Summer Time, and what assessment they have made of the possible impact of maintaining BST throughout the year.

The Government has no plans to review the use of British Summer Time.

In 2012, the Government published a review of the available evidence concerning the likely effects of moving to Central European Time (also known as Daylight Saving time) in the UK. This is attached, but is also available on the Government website at the following link.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/34587/12-1036-review-evidence-putting-clocks-forward.pdf

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Shadow Minister (Treasury)
15th Jun 2015
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they plan to reschedule psilocybin from Schedule 1 to Schedule 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 to enable its use for medicinal purposes, in particular with regard to alleviating the mental suffering of patients diagnosed with terminal cancer.

The Government has no plans to reschedule psilocybin. Drugs that are controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, such as psilocybin, are harmful and can damage people’s mental and physical health when misused. We will not circumvent the regulatory process by which drugs are assessed by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency for their safety and efficacy as medicines.

8th Dec 2014
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they intend to devolve responsibility for time in order that the Scottish Parliament can select the best clock time for daylight saving during the winter months.

Devolution of time was not included in the Smith Agreement reached between the five parties in Scotland, and this Government has no plans to devolve it.