Information between 7th May 2025 - 17th May 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 |
---|
7 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 283 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 88 Noes - 287 |
7 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 288 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 97 Noes - 363 |
7 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 287 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 160 Noes - 294 |
7 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 292 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 76 Noes - 295 |
12 May 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 309 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 316 Noes - 95 |
12 May 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 311 Labour No votes vs 4 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 90 Noes - 318 |
12 May 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 316 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 98 Noes - 402 |
12 May 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 306 Labour No votes vs 4 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 87 Noes - 404 |
12 May 2025 - Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 293 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 94 Noes - 315 |
13 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Sixth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 10 Noes - 6 |
13 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Sixth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 10 Noes - 2 |
13 May 2025 - UK-EU Summit - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 317 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 104 Noes - 402 |
13 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Sixth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 10 Noes - 6 |
13 May 2025 - UK-EU Summit - View Vote Context Luke Murphy 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 - 102 |
13 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fifth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 11 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 5 Noes - 12 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 2 Noes - 11 |
14 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 291 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 297 Noes - 168 |
14 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 294 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 366 Noes - 98 |
14 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy 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 - 304 Noes - 68 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 5 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 8 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 8 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 6 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Seventh sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 6 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 4 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Data (Use and Access) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 293 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 371 Noes - 98 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 11 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 1 Noes - 9 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 6 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 10 |
14 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Eighth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 10 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 11 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Tenth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Ninth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Tenth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Tenth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Ninth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 3 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Tenth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 6 Noes - 9 |
15 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Ninth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 6 Noes - 9 |
16 May 2025 - Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 200 Labour No votes vs 129 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 243 Noes - 279 |
16 May 2025 - Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 206 Labour Aye votes vs 127 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 288 Noes - 239 |
Written Answers |
---|
Children: Anxiety
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Friday 9th May 2025 Question to the Department for Education: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of training available to school and children's social care staff on (a) recognising and (b) responding to anxiety-led behaviour in children. Answered by Stephen Morgan - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education) This government is committed to improving mental health support for all children and young people. This is critical to breaking down barriers to opportunity and helping pupils to achieve and thrive in education. Support from the department includes an online resource hub that hosts practical and evidence-informed resources to support the delivery of a whole school approach to mental health and wellbeing. The hub includes support for responding to anxiety-related issues and can be found here: https://www.mentallyhealthyschools.org.uk/whole-school-or-college-resources/. Mental Health Support Teams (MHSTs) continue to roll out in schools and colleges across the country, delivering evidence-based interventions for early mental health issues and supporting mental health leads with their whole school approach. As of April 2024, MHSTs covered 44% of pupils in schools and learners in further education in England and the department expects coverage to have reached at least 50% of pupils and learners this year. Through expanding MHSTs, the government will make sure that every young person has access to early support to address problems before they escalate. Statutory guidance for virtual school heads sets out that they should, where possible, work with designated teachers to ensure that schools are able to identify signs of potential mental health issues and know how to access further assessment and support where necessary. This includes ensuring that schools understand the impact that issues such as trauma and attachment difficulties can have on looked-after and previously looked-after children. Provision of continuing professional development for employed social workers is a matter for their employer. The regulator for the social work profession, Social Work England, sets the professional standards which all social workers must meet. These require social workers to promote the strength and wellbeing of people, including children, and provide or support people to access advice and services tailored to meet their needs. |
Special Educational Needs
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Friday 9th May 2025 Question to the Department for Education: To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of the extent to which unmet support needs related to Special Educational Needs and Disability are considered in assessments of parenting capacity during child protection and pre-proceeding processes. Answered by Janet Daby - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education) As a child-centred government, we are taking forward significant reform of children’s social care to rebalance the system towards earlier intervention and ensure that children and families get access to the right help, at the point of need. Our Families First Partnership programme, backed by over £500 million in 2025/26, emphasises the importance of a whole family approach throughout the system of help, support and protection. The department’s statutory guidance ‘Working together to safeguard children’ encourages local authorities to consider appointing a Designated Social Care Officer who can help strengthen the links between social care services and the special educational needs and disabilities system, and co-ordinate children’s educational, health and care needs assessments with other social care assessments. The guidance is also clear that practitioners should consider the needs of parents when assessing whether a child is in need of protection. In pre-proceedings, the local authority should work in partnership with families and, where possible, any extra support or services needed to support the family should be identified and put in place.
|
Planning and Infrastructure Bill: Rivers
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 8th May 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of changes to the planning system in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill on the protection of chalk streams. Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 45278 on 30 April 2025. |
Personal Independence Payment: Veterans
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 8th May 2025 Question to the Department for Work and Pensions: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps her Department is taking to support veterans who were advised to claim Personal Independence Payment instead of Armed Forces Independence Payment. Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions) Veterans are able to access the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme (AFCS), which provides compensation for injury or illness caused or made worse by Service on or after 6 April 2005. For serious injuries and illness, the AFCS provides a tax-free index-linked income stream known as the Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP). The Armed Forces Independence Payment (AFIP) is an additional allowance which provides financial support for eligible service personnel and veterans who have an AFCS GIP. It is an alternative to PIP (and other disability benefits), based on separate eligibility criteria, but paid at the same rate as the combined enhanced daily living and mobility components. The eligibility criteria for AFIP is not due to change. If a veteran is advised to claim PIP rather than AFIP, it is most likely due to the fact that they would not be eligible for AFIP. If the long-term condition or disability is not service-related or if the GIP is below 50% of the veteran's salary, then PIP would be considered rather than AFIP. |
Timesharing
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Tuesday 13th May 2025 Question to the HM Treasury: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of the time taken for the Financial Ombudsman Service to make final decisions on fractional timeshare finance products on consumers. Answered by Emma Reynolds - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury) The government takes the issue of fraud very seriously and is dedicated to protecting the public from this devastating crime. Tackling fraud requires a unified and coordinated response from government, regulators, law enforcement and the private sector to better protect the public and businesses from fraud.
The legislation surrounding the sale of timeshares and credit agreements relating to timeshares provide routes of redress where consumers have been misled.
Firstly, it is an offence under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 for traders to engage in unfair commercial practices which mislead consumers, and it is punishable by a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. The Act will also afford rights of redress for consumers.
Regarding the timeshare market specifically, the Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Regulations 2010 provide protections for consumers buying and selling timeshares and other long-term “holiday club” memberships, including provision for consumers to withdraw from their contract.
Consumers are protected from fraud in consumer law. Consumers that believe they have been fraudulently sold timeshare products should raise their concerns with the relevant enforcement authorities.
In cases where a consumer took out a regulated financial product to purchase a timeshare, they may have recourse to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) if that product was mis-sold.
When complaints are made to the FOS, these should be dealt with in a timely manner. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Handbook, which sets out the rules on how the FOS should handle complaints, states that ‘the ombudsman will attempt to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage’. Ensuring timely outcomes is one of the FOS’s main priorities for 2025-26 and it has set itself a target to resolve 85 per cent of cases received in the year within 6 months.
|
Timesharing: Fraud and Misrepresentation
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Tuesday 13th May 2025 Question to the HM Treasury: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what steps her Department is taking to support consumers who have experienced potential (a) mis-selling and (b) fraud on fractional timeshare finance products. Answered by Emma Reynolds - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury) The government takes the issue of fraud very seriously and is dedicated to protecting the public from this devastating crime. Tackling fraud requires a unified and coordinated response from government, regulators, law enforcement and the private sector to better protect the public and businesses from fraud.
The legislation surrounding the sale of timeshares and credit agreements relating to timeshares provide routes of redress where consumers have been misled.
Firstly, it is an offence under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 for traders to engage in unfair commercial practices which mislead consumers, and it is punishable by a fine or imprisonment for up to two years. The Act will also afford rights of redress for consumers.
Regarding the timeshare market specifically, the Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Regulations 2010 provide protections for consumers buying and selling timeshares and other long-term “holiday club” memberships, including provision for consumers to withdraw from their contract.
Consumers are protected from fraud in consumer law. Consumers that believe they have been fraudulently sold timeshare products should raise their concerns with the relevant enforcement authorities.
In cases where a consumer took out a regulated financial product to purchase a timeshare, they may have recourse to the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) if that product was mis-sold.
When complaints are made to the FOS, these should be dealt with in a timely manner. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) Handbook, which sets out the rules on how the FOS should handle complaints, states that ‘the ombudsman will attempt to resolve complaints at the earliest possible stage’. Ensuring timely outcomes is one of the FOS’s main priorities for 2025-26 and it has set itself a target to resolve 85 per cent of cases received in the year within 6 months.
|
Mental Health Services: Children and Young People
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Tuesday 13th May 2025 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 adequacy of training available to (a) Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and (b) other healthcare staff on recognising and responding to anxiety-led behaviour in children. Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) It is the responsibility of each provider of mental health services to ensure that training meets the learning needs of their staff and that all staff adhere to and keep themselves appraised of National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance.
Additionally, NHS England provides a number of further training programmes that are accessible to Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and other healthcare staff.
We will also publish a refreshed workforce plan to deliver the transformed health service we will build over the next decade, and treat patients on time again. We will ensure the National Health Service has the right people, in the right places, with the right skills to deliver the care patients need when they need it. |
Timesharing: Contracts
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Wednesday 14th May 2025 Question to the Department for Business and Trade: To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential implications for its policies of paragraph 4.39 of the Competition and Markets Authority’s report entitled CMA project on Timeshare Disposal, released under FOI on 21 April 2015. Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) The Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Contracts Regulations 2010 govern the sales of timeshares. They provide significant protections, including stipulating the information consumers must be aware of prior to purchase and a14 day right to exit, should the customer change their mind. Purchasers of timeshares are also protected by general consumer law, requiring contract terms be fair and bans mis-selling. The CMA expressed the view that some in-perpetuity clauses may be unfair, depending on circumstances. Enabling consumers to exit timeshares is a balance between protecting consumers wanting to leave and the interests of the business and those customers who remain and share admin costs. |
Timesharing: Contracts
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Wednesday 14th May 2025 Question to the Department for Business and Trade: To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of introducing legislation to provide consumers with a statutory right to exit in-perpetuity timeshare contracts. Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) The Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Contracts Regulations 2010 govern the sales of timeshares. They provide significant protections, including stipulating the information consumers must be aware of prior to purchase and a14 day right to exit, should the customer change their mind. Purchasers of timeshares are also protected by general consumer law, requiring contract terms be fair and bans mis-selling. The CMA expressed the view that some in-perpetuity clauses may be unfair, depending on circumstances. Enabling consumers to exit timeshares is a balance between protecting consumers wanting to leave and the interests of the business and those customers who remain and share admin costs. |
Timesharing: Contracts
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Wednesday 14th May 2025 Question to the Department for Business and Trade: To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of in-perpetuity clauses in timeshare contracts on consumers. Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) The Timeshare, Holiday Products, Resale and Exchange Contracts Regulations 2010 govern the sales of timeshares. They provide significant protections, including stipulating the information consumers must be aware of prior to purchase and a14 day right to exit, should the customer change their mind. Purchasers of timeshares are also protected by general consumer law, requiring contract terms be fair and bans mis-selling. The CMA expressed the view that some in-perpetuity clauses may be unfair, depending on circumstances. Enabling consumers to exit timeshares is a balance between protecting consumers wanting to leave and the interests of the business and those customers who remain and share admin costs. |
IVF: Donors
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 15th May 2025 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of introducing enforceable limits on the number of children conceived from a single gamete donor. Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the United Kingdom’s fertility sector regulator, has advised that donor sperm, eggs, or embryos should not be used to create more than 10 families in the UK. The HFEA expects UK licensed clinics to ensure they do not breach the 10-family limit when using donors in treatment, as clearly specified in the HFEA Code of Practice. This limit only applies within the UK, so donors and recipients should be made aware that other countries might not have the same limits, or have no limits, on the number of children or families one donor can create. |
IVF: Donors
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 15th May 2025 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 effectiveness of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority in relation to the regulation of donor conception. Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) is required by law to maintain records and make certain information available upon request to those affected by donor conception. The HFEA was subject to a Public Bodies Review in 2023, where all aspects of the HFEA’s activity and performance was considered. The report was published on 23 November 2023, and is available at the following link: The Department reviews performance through quarterly accountability meetings on a continuing basis, which takes account of the recommendations set out in the report. |
IVF: Donors
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 15th May 2025 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 consistency of informed consent practices in donor conception. Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that it sets out strict requirements in its Licence Conditions and Code of Practice in relation to obtaining informed consent from egg, sperm, and embryo donors and patients undergoing donor conception treatment. The HFEA Code of Practice requires licensed clinics to provide donors and patients with appropriate information and an offer of counselling prior to consent being given. At inspections, the clinic’s procedures for obtaining consent are reviewed to ensure that patients and donors have provided all relevant consents before undergoing any licensed activity. All inspection reports and decisions are published on the HFEA’s website. The Department reviews the HFEA’s performance through quarterly accountability meetings on a continuing basis. |
IVF
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 15th May 2025 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 merits of introducing a national system for tracking gamete and embryo donors. Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the United Kingdom’s fertility sector regulator, has advised that HFEA licensed clinics are required by law to provide treatment and outcome information on all gamete or embryo donations taking place at clinics. The HFEA also runs the Donor Sibling Register, which enables people born through donor treatments in licenced clinics to trace their genetic origins. This information is published on the HFEA’s website. Clinics are required to monitor the usage of donor gametes and embryos in the UK, and to act in accordance with the guidance set out in the HFEA Code of Practice. |
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Thursday 15th May 2025 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether his Department plans to amend the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 to reflect developments in reproductive technology. Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care) The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) published Modernising Fertility Law in November 2023, which made a number of recommendations for legislative change, including around its regulatory powers. Ministers have met with the HFEA Chair and discussed the emerging regulatory challenges. The Government is considering the HFEA’s priorities for changing the law and will decide how to take this forward at the earliest opportunity. |
Postnatal Care
Asked by: Luke Murphy (Labour - Basingstoke) Friday 16th May 2025 Question to the Department of Health and Social Care: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that (a) access to weigh in services with health visitors and (b) other postnatal support is provided (i) consistently and (ii) accessibly to new parents in (A) Basingstoke, (B) Hampshire and (C) England. Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) Local authorities have responsibility for commissioning public health services, including health visiting and services for all new parents. The Healthy Child Programme sets out the services and support families can expect and includes guidance on weighing, screening, immunisation, health improvement, wellbeing, and parenting, as well as five mandated health and development reviews. Department officials and NHS England have worked across the South East region to develop resources. This includes a Health Visiting Development Toolkit to help share best practice and ensure consistency. The Government is committed to raising the healthiest generation of children ever and strengthening the health visiting service. To achieve this, we must ensure that families have the support they need to give their babies and children the best start and the building blocks for a healthy life. |
Parliamentary Debates |
---|
Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Seventh sitting)
124 speeches (16,905 words) Committee stage: 7th sitting Wednesday 14th May 2025 - Public Bill Committees Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government |
Select Committee Documents |
---|
Wednesday 7th May 2025
Attendance statistics - Member attendance (Session 2024-25) Energy Security and Net Zero Committee Found: of 20 (90.0%) Anneliese Midgley (Labour, Knowsley) (added 21 Oct 2024) 14 of 20 (70.0%) Luke Murphy |
Bill Documents |
---|
May. 15 2025
Written evidence submitted by The Mammal Society (PIB129) Planning and Infrastructure Bill 2024-26 Written evidence Found: Minister Gen Kitchen Labour Wellingborough and Rushden Amanda Martin Labour Portsmouth North Luke Murphy |
Calendar |
---|
Wednesday 7th May 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Tidal power and the Severn At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Sarah Williams-Gardener - Chair at Western Gateway Shaun Gaffey - Senior Planner at RSPB Cymru Dr Athanasios Angeloudis - Reader in Environmental Fluid Mechanics at School of Engineering, University of Edinburgh At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Sue Bartlett-Reed - Commissioner at Severn Estuary Commission Chris Mills - Commissioner at Severn Estuary Commission Dr Andrew Garrad CBE - Chair at Severn Estuary Commission View calendar - Add to calendar |
Thursday 15th May 2025 2 p.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 13th May 2025 9:25 a.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 14th May 2025 9:25 a.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Thursday 15th May 2025 11:30 a.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 14th May 2025 2 p.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 13th May 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Workforce planning to deliver clean, secure energy At 3:30pm: Oral evidence Sarah Jones MP - Minister of State at Department for Energy Security and Net Zero View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 13th May 2025 3 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Workforce planning to deliver clean, secure energy At 3:30pm: Oral evidence Sarah Jones MP - Minister of State at Department for Energy Security and Net Zero View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 13th May 2025 3 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Workforce planning to deliver clean, secure energy At 3:30pm: Oral evidence Sarah Jones MP - Minister of State at Department for Energy Security and Net Zero Hugo Jones - Deputy Director for Green Growth at Department for Energy Security and Net Zero View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 13th May 2025 2 p.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 21st May 2025 2:15 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: National planning for energy infrastructure At 2:30pm: Oral evidence Lawrence Slade FEI - Chief Executive at Energy Networks Associaiton Charlotte Mitchell - Chief Planning Officer at National Grid Electricity Transmission At 3:30pm: Oral evidence Charles Wood - Deputy Director, Policy (Systems) at Energy UK Chandni Ruparelia - Chief Operating Officer at Island Green Power Eleri Wilce - Head of Offshore Consents UK & Ireland at RWE Renewables View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 21st May 2025 2:15 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: National planning for energy infrastructure View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 20th May 2025 9:25 a.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Thursday 22nd May 2025 11:30 a.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Thursday 22nd May 2025 2 p.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 21st May 2025 9 a.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: National planning for energy infrastructure At 9:30am: Oral evidence Sam Richards - Chief Executive Officer at Britain Remade Jackie Copley MRTPI - Campaigns Lead at Campaign for Protection of Rural England Isobel Morris - Senior Policy Officer - Energy at Royal Society for the Protection of Birds At 10:30am: Oral evidence Peta Donkin - Board Member and Policy and Practice Lead at National Infrastructure Planning Association Ali Leeder - Director at Aeos Infrastructure Planning Graham Gunby - National Infrastructure Planning Manager at Suffolk County Council View calendar - Add to calendar |
Tuesday 20th May 2025 2 p.m. Planning and Infrastructure Bill - Debate Subject: Further to consider the Bill View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 21st May 2025 2:15 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: National planning for energy infrastructure At 2:30pm: Oral evidence Lawrence Slade FEI - Chief Executive at Energy Networks Associaiton Charlotte Mitchell - Chief Planning Officer at National Grid Electricity Transmission Julian Leslie CEng FIET - Director Strategic Energy Planning and Chief Engineer at National Energy System Operator (NESO) At 3:30pm: Oral evidence Charles Wood - Deputy Director, Policy (Systems) at Energy UK Chandni Ruparelia - Chief Operating Officer at Island Green Power Eleri Wilce - Head of Offshore Consents UK & Ireland at RWE Renewables View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 4th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: The cost of energy At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Caroline Abrahams - Charity Director at Age UK Maria Booker - Head of Policy at Fair By Design Matt Copeland - Head of Policy and Public Affairs at National Energy Action View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 4th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: The cost of energy At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Caroline Abrahams - Charity Director at Age UK Maria Booker - Head of Policy at Fair By Design Matt Copeland - Head of Policy and Public Affairs at National Energy Action At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Merlin Hyman - Chief Executive at Regen Angus McCarey - Chief Executive Officer at Uswitch Dhara Vyas - Chief Executive Officer at Energy UK View calendar - Add to calendar |