Information between 7th April 2026 - 17th April 2026
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 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 290 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 299 Noes - 169 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 274 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 73 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 276 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 281 Noes - 70 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 281 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 356 Noes - 90 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 284 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 101 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 237 Labour Aye votes vs 12 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 21 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 271 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 158 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 241 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 301 Noes - 157 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 285 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 291 Noes - 174 |
|
14 Apr 2026 - Crime and Policing Bill - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 295 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 307 Noes - 176 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 237 Labour Aye votes vs 12 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 247 Noes - 21 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 281 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 356 Noes - 90 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 274 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 73 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 276 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 281 Noes - 70 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 271 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 277 Noes - 158 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 284 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 101 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 285 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 291 Noes - 174 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 241 Labour Aye votes vs 1 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 301 Noes - 157 |
|
15 Apr 2026 - Unpublished Divisions: Crime and Policing Bill (14 April 2026) - View Vote Context Kate Osamor voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 290 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 299 Noes - 169 |
| Speeches |
|---|
|
Kate Osamor speeches from: Oral Answers to Questions
Kate Osamor contributed 3 speeches (99 words) Thursday 16th April 2026 - Commons Chamber Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Missing Persons
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Monday 13th April 2026 Question to the Home Office: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to address the disproportionate number of Black and Black mixed heritage young people who are reported missing in the UK. Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office) The Government is committed to working to ensure that children and young people are kept safe from harm, including when they are reported missing. This includes working to ensure that police forces are equipped to respond appropriately and working effectively with other multiagency safeguarding partners. I recognise the concerns previously raised about unconscious bias in the police response to missing persons from BAME communities. Following NPCC research to explore disproportionality and discrimination in police missing persons investigations, forces across England and Wales continue to improve practice and responses to address this. The report can be found here: We will continue to work across government and with partners to ensure an effective whole-system response when someone goes missing, while also working to address the underlying harms that lead to these complex situations. |
|
Iran: Armed Conflict
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Tuesday 14th April 2026 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to establish an independent UN investigation into civilian casualties and possible war crimes in the US conflict with Iran. Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) The UK has maintained the position over several decades that all parties in all conflicts should comply with International Humanitarian Law and take every possible step to minimise harm to civilians. We continue to support the remit and independence of the established bodies who monitor compliance with these principles. |
|
West Bank: Land
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Tuesday 14th April 2026 Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has had discussions with the Israeli government on its land registration process in Area C of the West Bank. Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) We condemn the decision to expand land registration requirements in Area C of the West Bank, and other recent Israeli Security Cabinet decisions that extend Israel's control over the West Bank, and accelerate illegal settlement activity. |
|
Medical Treatments: Cost Effectiveness
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Thursday 16th April 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will publish an impact assessment of changes to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellent (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold. Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) I refer the Hon. Member to the answer I gave to the Hon. Member for Oxford West and Abingdon on 4 March 2026 to question 114047. |
|
General Practitioners: Contracts
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Thursday 16th April 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of proposed changes to the GP contract in England on (a) minoritised ethnic groups and (b) those with less visible and chronic conditions. Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Department and NHS England assessed the potential impacts of the proposed changes to the GP Contract for 2026/27 throughout the policy-development process, including Equality Impact Assessments, which consider the impact of policy changes against protected characteristics, in line with the public sector equality duty. In relation to minoritised ethnic groups, the assessment found no evidence that the proposed changes would result in adverse impacts. The Department considers that several elements of the contract changes may support more equitable outcomes, including improvements to vaccination programmes and refinements to the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), where uptake and disease prevalence are known to vary across different ethnic groups. In relation to people with less visible and chronic conditions, we do not anticipate any adverse impact from the changes. Measures to improve access, continuity of care, and proactive management of long‑term conditions are expected to benefit patients with ongoing and complex health needs. In particular, the introduction of continuity of care as a core requirement will require practices and primary care networks to use risk‑stratification tools more systematically to target continuity where it is most beneficial, supporting more consistent clinical relationships, and better outcomes. The updated QOF requirements for long term and chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart failure, and obesity, align indicators with updated National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance, and support earlier intervention and preventative care to improve clinical outcomes for patients. In addition, clarifying expectations around not asking patients to call back another day, and clinically urgent and non‑urgent requests, will support timely management of requests, reduce repeat contacts, and will help to avoid any patients being left without appropriate follow-up. The Department and NHS England will continue to monitor the impact of the GP Contract through workforce data, patient access metrics, and patient experience data, including demographic information collected through the GP Patient Survey, in order to identify and respond to any emerging differential impacts. |
|
Medical Treatments: Cost Effectiveness
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Labour (Co-op) - Edmonton and Winchmore Hill) Thursday 16th April 2026 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what plans are in place to ensure any changes to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellent (NICE) cost-effectiveness threshold are subject to parliamentary and public scrutiny. Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has implemented a new cost-effectiveness threshold in its technology appraisals of £25,000 to £35,000 which is an increase from the previous threshold of £20,000 to £30,000. The new threshold is in line with the commitments made in the US-UK Economic Prosperity Deal announced in December 2025. The Government has engaged extensively with NICE, NHS England, the pharmaceutical industry and other parties throughout the process. The Government’s intended approach was set out in a Written Ministerial Statement on 13 April 2026, which is available at the following link: https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2026-04-13/hlws1493 In addition, my Rt. Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, wrote to the chairs of the Health and Social Care Committee and the Science, Innovation and Technology Committee to inform them of the regulatory changes. |