Information between 11th October 2025 - 20th November 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 |
|---|
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 161 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 192 Noes - 239 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 162 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 204 Noes - 215 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 142 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 169 Noes - 212 |
|
15 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 117 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 139 Noes - 186 |
|
15 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 163 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 200 Noes - 194 |
|
21 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 162 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 262 Noes - 157 |
|
21 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 167 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 270 Noes - 160 |
|
21 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 103 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 138 Noes - 138 |
|
21 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 136 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 212 Noes - 144 |
|
21 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 158 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 253 Noes - 153 |
|
22 Oct 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 156 Conservative Aye votes vs 1 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 246 Noes - 169 |
|
22 Oct 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 145 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 163 Noes - 236 |
|
28 Oct 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 158 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 240 Noes - 143 |
|
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 181 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 201 Noes - 238 |
|
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 179 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 193 Noes - 236 |
|
11 Nov 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Lord Wei voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 185 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 207 Noes - 240 |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Home Education
Asked by: Lord Wei (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 4th November 2025 Question to the Department for Education: To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Department for Education has issued any guidance, formal or informal, to further education colleges or local authorities encouraging them to restrict direct applications from electively home educated students aged 14–16 to avoid any administrative burdens which might be placed on them by the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill; and if not, what steps they are taking to ensure that public statements by such institutions do not misrepresent government policy. Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions) The department has not issued any guidance, formal or informal, to further education colleges or local authorities encouraging them to restrict direct applications from electively home educated children. Home educating parents can supplement their child’s education through attendance at part-time further education courses, as part of securing an efficient, full-time and suitable education for their child. The department supports parents’ right to exercise this choice, and this position will not change with the implementation of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Decisions regarding the availability of such courses are at the discretion of each college, who may make decisions based on factors such as available capacity and resources, and may liaise with their local authority as part of this. Funding for part-time courses below level 3 is available to colleges so long as the 14-16 funding arrangements detailed in the funding rates and formula guidance are followed. To support implementation of Bill measures, the department will issue statutory guidance to aid local authorities and parents. |
|
Schools: Attendance
Asked by: Lord Wei (Conservative - Life peer) Wednesday 12th November 2025 Question to the Department for Education: To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Early Education on 30 May (HC50978) which stated that they were conducting a data protection impact assessment and further to remarks by Baroness Smith of Malvern on 22 May (HL Deb col 443) stating they were consulting the Information Commissioner’s Office in connection with the ‘child not in school’ registers, when they plan to publish that data protection impact assessment, and whether it will cover the use of consistent identifiers. Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions) The department intends to publish the Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) for the Children Not in School (CNIS) registers prior to their implementation. We are continuing to engage with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the DPIA to ensure that all data protection risks have been identified and mitigated before any processing of data begins. |
| Live Transcript |
|---|
|
Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm. |
|
20 Oct 2025, 10:13 p.m. - House of Lords "guidance is advisory, and who is going to enforce it? My Noble friend Lord Wei Catherine. >> And I have. >> Spent enough time dealing with " Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts (Conservative) - View Video - View Transcript |