Information between 1st July 2025 - 11th July 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 |
|---|
|
2 Jul 2025 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 326 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 333 Noes - 168 |
|
2 Jul 2025 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 327 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 338 Noes - 79 |
|
2 Jul 2025 - Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 276 Labour Aye votes vs 9 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 385 Noes - 26 |
|
2 Jul 2025 - Armed Forces Commissioner Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 314 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 321 Noes - 158 |
|
2 Jul 2025 - Prisons - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 326 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 333 Noes - 168 |
|
2 Jul 2025 - Competition - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 327 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 338 Noes - 79 |
|
8 Jul 2025 - Football Governance Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 338 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 167 Noes - 346 |
|
8 Jul 2025 - Football Governance Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 331 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 415 Noes - 98 |
|
8 Jul 2025 - Football Governance Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 333 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 178 Noes - 338 |
|
8 Jul 2025 - Football Governance Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 336 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 86 Noes - 340 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House One of 47 Labour Aye votes vs 331 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 149 Noes - 334 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 377 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 103 Noes - 416 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 356 Labour No votes vs 8 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 35 Noes - 469 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 377 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 175 Noes - 401 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 364 Labour No votes vs 7 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 105 Noes - 370 |
|
9 Jul 2025 - Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill - View Vote Context Alex Sobel voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House One of 35 Labour Aye votes vs 333 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 130 Noes - 443 |
| Speeches |
|---|
|
Alex Sobel speeches from: Football Governance Bill [Lords]
Alex Sobel contributed 2 speeches (816 words) Report stage Tuesday 8th July 2025 - Commons Chamber Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Criminal Injuries Compensation: Standards
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Thursday 3rd July 2025 Question to the Ministry of Justice: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what support her Department provides to victims of violent crimes who have been waiting more than twelve months for a decision on their Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority claim. Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice) The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 (the 2012 Scheme) does not prescribe a time limit for applications to be decided. The majority of applications are decided within 12 months. Each case must be considered on its own facts and assessed based on the information available. In almost all cases, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) needs to get information from third parties such as the police and medical authorities to help assess applications. Some applications will by necessity take longer to decide. This could be where information is not available due to ongoing court proceedings, CICA needs time to assess the long-term impacts of complex injuries (e.g. brain injuries), or where there is an application for loss of earnings where the 2012 Scheme requires at least 28 weeks of loss. |
|
Criminal Injuries Compensation: Standards
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Thursday 3rd July 2025 Question to the Ministry of Justice: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if her Department will support the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority to reduce claim processing times. Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice) The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 (the 2012 Scheme) does not prescribe a time limit for applications to be decided. The majority of applications are decided within 12 months. Each case must be considered on its own facts and assessed based on the information available. In almost all cases, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) needs to get information from third parties such as the police and medical authorities to help assess applications. Some applications will by necessity take longer to decide. This could be where information is not available due to ongoing court proceedings, CICA needs time to assess the long-term impacts of complex injuries (e.g. brain injuries), or where there is an application for loss of earnings where the 2012 Scheme requires at least 28 weeks of loss. |
|
Overseas Trade: Western Sahara
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Thursday 3rd July 2025 Question to the Cabinet Office: To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how much of the UK's trade with Morocco is with Western Sahara. Answered by Georgia Gould - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office) The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.
A response to the Hon gentleman’s Parliamentary Question of 26th June is attached.
|
|
Asylum: Syria
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Thursday 3rd July 2025 Question to the Home Office: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 9 June 2025 to Question 58258 on Asylum: Syria, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of granting Syrian asylum seekers in the UK the right to work throughout the period in which all asylum interviews and decisions relating to Syrian nationals are paused. Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Home Office) Asylum seekers who have had their claim outstanding for 12 months or more, through no fault of their own, can apply for permission to work. Those permitted to work are restricted to jobs on the Immigration Salary List. This policy applies to Syrian nationals whose asylum claims have been temporarily paused while we await reliable and objective information to enable an accurate assessment of the risk they may face upon return to Syria. The pause on Syrian asylum claims is under constant review and as soon as there is a clear basis upon which to make decisions, we will resume the processing of them. |
|
Morocco: Foreign Relations
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Wednesday 9th July 2025 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether he had discussions with his Moroccan counterpart during the formulation of the UK-Morocco Joint Communiqué on whether Morocco’s willingness to engage in discussions in good faith extends to dialogue without restrictions. Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) On 1 June, the Foreign Secretary co-chaired the 5th session of the UK-Morocco Strategic Dialogue in Rabat with Minister Nasser Bourita. Discussions were wide-ranging and constructive, reflecting the strong bilateral relationship and shared commitment to a strengthened strategic partnership. The Foreign Secretary endorsed Morocco's autonomy proposal as the most credible, viable and pragmatic basis for a lasting resolution of the Western Sahara conflict. In that context, we continue to support the UN-led process to achieve a just, lasting and mutually acceptable solution, based on compromise, which conforms with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, including the principle of respect for self-determination. The Joint Communique expresses our shared conviction to renew efforts to support the UN Personal Envoy of the Secretary General for Western Sahara in the search for a solution to the Western Sahara conflict, underlining that the only viable and durable solution will be one that is mutually acceptable to the relevant parties, and is arrived at through compromise. We welcome Morocco's stated commitment to further detail and willingness to engage in good faith with all relevant parties, to expand on details of what autonomy within the Moroccan State could entail for the region, with a view to restarting serious negotiations on terms acceptable to the parties. |
|
Artificial Intelligence
Asked by: Alex Sobel (Labour (Co-op) - Leeds Central and Headingley) Tuesday 8th July 2025 Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology: To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, whether he plans to introduce mandatory requirements for AI developers to disclose information about their systems. Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology) Artificial intelligence is the defining opportunity of our generation, and the Government is taking action to harness its economic benefits for UK citizens. As set out in the AI Opportunities Action Plan, we believe most AI systems should be regulated at the point of use, with our expert regulators best placed to do so. Departments are working proactively with regulators to provide clear strategic direction and support them on their AI capability needs. Through well-designed and implemented regulation, we can fuel fast, wide and safe development and adoption of AI. |
| Early Day Motions Signed |
|---|
|
Monday 30th June Alex Sobel signed this EDM on Wednesday 16th July 2025 Methanol poisoning, UK traveller risk, awareness and education in schools 26 signatures (Most recent: 16 Jul 2025)Tabled by: Tom Morrison (Liberal Democrat - Cheadle) That this House is deeply concerned by ongoing deaths and serious injuries among UK nationals overseas caused by methanol poisoning, where industrial alcohol is unknowingly consumed in counterfeit or contaminated spirits; notes that methanol poisoning has occurred in countries including Indonesia, Laos, India, Brazil, Turkey and within Europe; further notes … |
| Parliamentary Debates |
|---|
|
Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill
97 speeches (26,267 words) Committee stage part one Tuesday 8th July 2025 - Lords Chamber Home Office Mentions: 1: Lord Alton of Liverpool (XB - Life peer) This issue was specifically raised by Mr Alex Sobel, Member of Parliament for Leeds, who encouraged us - Link to Speech |
|
Football Governance Bill [Lords]
117 speeches (25,984 words) Report stage Tuesday 8th July 2025 - Commons Chamber Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport Mentions: 1: Chris Evans (LAB - Caerphilly) Friend the Member for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel). - Link to Speech 2: Lisa Nandy (Lab - Wigan) Evans), for Oldham East and Saddleworth (Debbie Abrahams) and for Leeds Central and Headingley (Alex Sobel - Link to Speech |
| Select Committee Documents |
|---|
|
Friday 11th July 2025
Special Report - 3rd Special Report - Legislative scrutiny: Mental Health Bill: Government Response Human Rights (Joint Committee) Found: Gordon (Liberal Democrat; Harrogate and Knaresborough) Afzal Khan (Labour; Manchester Rusholme) Alex Sobel |
|
Friday 11th July 2025
Special Report - Second Special Report: Accountability For Daesh Crimes: Government Response to the Committee's Second Report of Session 2024 - 2025 Human Rights (Joint Committee) Found: Gordon (Liberal Democrat; Harrogate and Knaresborough) Afzal Khan (Labour; Manchester Rusholme) Alex Sobel |
|
Tuesday 8th July 2025
Oral Evidence - The Curriculum and Assessment Review Education Committee Found: Human Rights (Joint Committee) member present: Alex Sobel. |
|
Tuesday 1st July 2025
Oral Evidence - Dr Mary-Ann Stephenson Human Rights (Joint Committee) Found: Dholakia; Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws; Afzal Khan; Tom Gordon; Baroness Lawrence of Clarendon; Alex Sobel |
| Bill Documents |
|---|
|
Jul. 09 2025
Committee of the whole House Amendments as at 9 July 2025 - large print Universal Credit Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: _2(b) Debbie Abrahams Alex Sobel Siân Berry Ellie Chowns Carla Denyer Adrian Ramsay Clive Efford |
|
Jul. 09 2025
Committee of the whole House Proceedings as at 9 July 2025 Universal Credit Bill 2024-26 Bill proceedings: Commons Found: proposed lower rate. 3 COMMITTEE STAGE Wednesday 9 July 2025 Not called_2(b) Debbie Abrahams Alex Sobel |
|
Jul. 09 2025
Committee of the whole House Amendments as at as at 9 July 2025 Universal Credit Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: Brian Leishman Kim Johnson Ian Lavery Jon Trickett Sorcha Eastwood Siân Berry Clive Lewis Alex Sobel |
|
Jul. 09 2025
Crime and Policing Bill 2024-25: Progress of the bill Crime and Policing Bill 2024-26 Briefing papers Found: Act 2022 and the Public Order Act 2023).224 The committee considered new clause 53, tabled by Alex Sobel |
|
Jul. 08 2025
Notices of Amendments as at 8 July 2025 Universal Credit Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: _42 Nadia Whittome Alex Sobel Ian Byrne Rachael Maskell Andy McDonald Siân Berry Adrian Ramsay |
|
Jul. 08 2025
Notices of Amendments as at 8 July 2025 - large print Universal Credit Bill 2024-26 Amendment Paper Found: _42 Nadia Whittome Alex Sobel Ian Byrne Rachael Maskell Andy McDonald Siân Berry Adrian Ramsay |
|
Jul. 08 2025
Consideration of Bill Amendments as at 8 July 2025 - large print Football Governance Act 2025 Amendment Paper Found: _NC6 Alex Sobel Chris Evans Kim Johnson Ms Stella Creasy Iqbal Mohamed Liz Jarvis . |
|
Jul. 08 2025
Consideration of Bill Amendments as at 8 July 2025 Football Governance Act 2025 Amendment Paper Found: _NC6 Alex Sobel Chris Evans Kim Johnson Ms Stella Creasy Iqbal Mohamed Liz Jarvis . |
|
Jul. 07 2025
Notices of Amendments as at 7 July 2025 Football Governance Act 2025 Amendment Paper Found: _NC6 Alex Sobel Chris Evans Kim Johnson Ms Stella Creasy Iqbal Mohamed . |
|
Jul. 04 2025
Notices of Amendments as at 4 July 2025 Football Governance Act 2025 Amendment Paper Found: _NC6 Alex Sobel Chris Evans Kim Johnson Ms Stella Creasy Iqbal Mohamed . |
|
Jul. 03 2025
Notices of Amendments as at 3 July 2025 Football Governance Act 2025 Amendment Paper Found: _NC6 Alex Sobel Chris Evans ★. |
|
Jun. 18 2025
All proceedings up to 18 June 2025 at Report Stage Crime and Policing Bill 2024-26 Bill proceedings: Commons Found: Carolyn Harris Dame Harriett Baldwin Afzal Khan Rosie Duffield Danny Kruger Mark Garnier Alex Sobel |
| Calendar |
|---|
|
Wednesday 16th July 2025 2 p.m. Human Rights (Joint Committee) - Private Meeting View calendar - Add to calendar |
| Select Committee Inquiry |
|---|
|
10 Jul 2025
Human Rights of Children in the Social Care System in England Human Rights (Joint Committee) (Select) Not accepting submissions Out of nearly 12 million children living in England, over 400,000 are in the social care system at any one time.[1] Out of these, nearly 84,000 children in England are” in care” (i.e. being looked after by local authorities).[2] Across the UK, it is estimated that 107,000 children are in care.[3] In 2023, the then Government proposed a plan to reform children’s social care, in its “Stable Homes, Built on Love” strategy. It proposed a series of “missions” to improve the quality of the support provided to children and their families, such as providing better training to social workers, and listening more to children and young people. In 2024, the current Government announced the “biggest overhaul in a generation to children’s social care”, with the stated aim to provide a “wide range of new reform measures… to deliver better outcomes and a more secure life for children across the country”.[4] Against this background, this inquiry will consider the extent to which the human rights of children in England are protected in the social care system. This inquiry will have a particular focus on children in care (“looked after children”), but wider aspects of the children’s social care system will be relevant, for example in regard to the availability of additional support to families with disabled children or to the efficacy of early intervention measures.
[1] This figure includes children in care as well as children assessed as needing help and protection as a result of risks to their development or health. Ofsted, Main findings: children’s social care in England 2024. [2] Ofsted, Main findings: children’s social care in England 2024. A child is in care, or is a “looked after child” if they are in local authority care by reason of a care order or are being provided with accommodation under section 20 of the 1989 Act for more than 24 hours with the agreement of the parents, or of the child if the child is aged 16 or over (section 22(1) and (2) of the 1989 Act). [3] Become, Why the care system has to change [4] Biggest overhaul in a generation to children’s social care - GOV.UK |
|
23 Jul 2025
Proposal for a draft Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order 2025 Human Rights (Joint Committee) (Select) Not accepting submissions Background Section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 provides that in proceedings under that Act in respect of a judicial act done in good faith, damages may not be awarded except in two circumstances. The first is to compensate a person to the extent required by Article 5(5) of the European Convention on Human Rights (‘ECHR’) (deprivation of liberty). The second is to compensate a person for a judicial act that is incompatible with Article 6 ECHR (right to fair trial) in circumstances where the person is detained and, but for the incompatibility, the person would not have been detained or would not have been detained for so long. In the case of Re W (A Child) [2016] EWCA Civ 1140, the Court of Appeal found that accusations of professional misconduct against a witness made by a Family Court judge breached her rights under Article 8 of the ECHR (right to respect for private life). In its judgment of 22 June 2021 in SW v United Kingdom (Application no. 87/18), the European Court of Human Rights held that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the ECHR (right to an effective remedy), because the effect of section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 was that the witness could not bring a claim for damages in respect of a judicial act that was incompatible with Article 8. Government proposals On 17 July 2025, the Government laid before both Houses of Parliament its proposal for a Remedial Order to amend the Human Rights Act 1998. The proposed order is intended to give effect to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in SW v United Kingdom, by remedying the incompatibility of section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 with Article 13 of the ECHR. The Government proposes to address this incompatibility by amending section 9(3) to allow damages to be awarded to compensate a person for a judicial act on an additional basis: that the judicial act is incompatible with Article 8 on the ground that it was done in such a procedurally defective way as to amount to a breach of the requirements of procedural fairness under that Article. Section 9(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998 was previously amended by the Human Rights Act 1998 (Remedial) Order 2020 to give effect to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Hammerton v United Kingdom (Application no. 6287/10). See the Fifteenth Report of the Joint Committee on Human Rights of Session 2017-19, and its Second Report of Session 2019-21.
Remedial Orders Section 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives Ministers of the Crown the power to make remedial orders. The section applies if it appears to the Minister that, having regard to a finding of the European Court of Human Rights in proceedings against the United Kingdom, a provision of legislation is incompatible with an obligation of the United Kingdom arising from the Convention. In those circumstances, the Minister may by order make such amendments to the legislation as the Minister considers necessary to remove the incompatibility, if the Minister considers that there are compelling reasons for doing so. Reporting on the proposal The Joint Committee on Human Rights is required to report to Parliament on any proposal for a remedial order to be made under the Human Rights Act 1998. The Committee has 60 sitting days to report to each House its recommendation whether a draft order in the same terms as the proposal should be laid before the House. |
|
25 Jun 2025
Human Rights and the Regulation of AI Human Rights (Joint Committee) (Select) Submit Evidence (by 5 Sep 2025)
In recent years there has been growth in the development and application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies. These can be used for a wide variety of applications. There is no universally agreed definition of AI or AI technologies. The then Government’s 2023 policy paper on “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation” defined Artificial Intelligence (AI), AI systems or AI technologies as “products and services that are ‘adaptable’ and ‘autonomous’.” Adaptability refers to AI systems, after being trained, developing the ability to perform new ways of finding patterns and connections in data that are not directly envisioned by their human programmers. Autonomy refers to AI systems making decisions without the intent or ongoing control of a human. Many argue that AI technologies can offer great benefits to individuals and society – for example, assisting in decision-making and improving productivity. Others are concerned about risks such as:
On 5 September 2024, the UK signed the Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law. It is the first legally binding treaty in this area and "aims to ensure that activities within the lifecycle of artificial intelligence systems are fully consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law, while being conducive to technological progress and innovation." The UK also adheres to the OECD’s AI Principles, which were the “first intergovernmental standard on AI”. The five principles are:
The UK Government has signalled its intention to “bring forward legislation which allows us to safely realise the enormous benefits and opportunities of the most powerful AI systems for years to come.” (PQ 41098 on Artificial Intelligence: Regulation, 31 March 2025) Against this backdrop, the Joint Committee on Human Rights will explore what regulation might be required in order to safeguard human rights when AI technologies are being developed and used, and any implications this might have for future legislation. The inquiry will not be considering topics such as social media, misinformation and harmful algorithms,[3] or how malign actors are seeking to undermine democracy.[4] While these are important topics, they are outside the scope of this inquiry.
[1] POSTbrief 57, Artificial intelligence: An explainer, 14 December 2023 [2] UK Parliament, Artificial Intelligence (AI) glossary, January 2024 [3] The subject of a report by the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee: Social media, misinformation and harmful algorithms [4] The subject of a current inquiry by the Foreign Affairs Committee: Disinformation diplomacy: How malign actors are seeking to undermine democracy |