Information between 12th July 2025 - 11th August 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 |
|---|
|
15 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 171 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 282 Noes - 158 |
|
15 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 191 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 215 Noes - 240 |
|
15 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 142 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 214 Noes - 153 |
|
15 Jul 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 188 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 237 Noes - 223 |
|
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury 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 - 161 Noes - 191 |
|
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury 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 - 232 Noes - 137 |
|
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury 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 - 267 Noes - 153 |
|
14 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 171 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 264 Noes - 158 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 134 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 180 Noes - 123 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 136 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 155 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 140 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 202 Noes - 138 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 135 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 184 Noes - 123 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 197 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 304 Noes - 160 |
|
16 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 178 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 150 |
|
21 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 92 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 106 Noes - 140 |
|
21 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 75 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 92 Noes - 130 |
|
21 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 191 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 266 Noes - 162 |
|
21 Jul 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 160 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 216 Noes - 143 |
|
22 Jul 2025 - Enterprise Act 2002 (Mergers Involving Newspaper Enterprises and Foreign Powers) Regulations 2025 - View Vote Context Baroness Prentis of Banbury voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 100 Conservative No votes vs 41 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 155 Noes - 267 |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Local Government: Investment
Asked by: Baroness Prentis of Banbury (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 24th July 2025 Question to the HM Treasury: To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Community Municipal Investment (CMI) green investment bonds, such as those offered by the London Boroughs of Greenwich, Southwark, Hounslow and Hammersmith and Fulham, are authorised by any regulator; and whether retail investors in such municipal bonds have any form of protection under the (1) Financial Services Ombudsman Scheme or (2) Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Answered by Lord Livermore - Financial Secretary (HM Treasury) The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 establishes a framework whereby any person, whether an individual or firm, can only carry out a regulated activity by way of business if they are authorised by the appropriate regulator or are exempt from the authorisation requirement. Under this framework, the government determines which activities are regulated activities, by specifying them in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (RAO). Where local authorities are the issuers of bonds, or borrowers under loans, they themselves would not require authorisation from a financial services regulator to act in that capacity, and would not be subject to regulation by the financial services regulators. Financial services firms facilitating access to such funding by local authorities may, depending on the circumstances, be subject to regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority, and investors may be eligible to refer disputes with the regulated firm to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Depending on the precise circumstances of any products offered, compensation in the case of default may be available under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. |
|
Churches: Choirs
Asked by: Baroness Prentis of Banbury (Conservative - Life peer) Tuesday 29th July 2025 Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport: To ask His Majesty's Government whether they are considering adding the church choral tradition to the list of inventories under the UN Convention on the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Answered by Baroness Twycross - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) Communities of practice will be able to submit their living heritage to the inventories when we open for submissions later this year. We would welcome a submission on church choral tradition. |
| Bill Documents |
|---|
|
Jul. 24 2025
HL Bill 84-VIII(h) Amendments for Committee (Supplementary to the Eighth Marshalled List) Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill 2 After Clause 62 BARONESS PRENTIS OF BANBURY BARONESS HELIC |
|
Jul. 18 2025
HL Bill 122-I Marshalled list for Third Reading House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Clause 6 BARONESS SMITH OF BASILDON LORD NEWBY BARONESS PRENTIS OF BANBURY 2_ Clause 6, page 3, line |