Information between 8th December 2024 - 7th January 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 |
---|
9 Dec 2024 - Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 335 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 89 Noes - 340 |
17 Dec 2024 - National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 345 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 354 Noes - 202 |
17 Dec 2024 - National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 346 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 195 Noes - 353 |
17 Dec 2024 - National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 345 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 352 |
17 Dec 2024 - National Insurance Contributions (Secondary Class 1 Contributions) Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 346 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 100 Noes - 351 |
11 Dec 2024 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 311 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 332 Noes - 170 |
11 Dec 2024 - Trade - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 298 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 375 Noes - 9 |
11 Dec 2024 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 313 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 338 Noes - 170 |
11 Dec 2024 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 302 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 104 Noes - 313 |
11 Dec 2024 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 303 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 105 Noes - 314 |
11 Dec 2024 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context Neil Coyle voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 310 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 167 Noes - 329 |
Speeches |
---|
Neil Coyle speeches from: United Front Work Department
Neil Coyle contributed 1 speech (74 words) Monday 16th December 2024 - Commons Chamber Home Office |
Written Answers |
---|
Delivery Services: Fast Food
Asked by: Neil Coyle (Labour - Bermondsey and Old Southwark) Thursday 19th December 2024 Question to the Department for Business and Trade: To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what steps his Department is taking with (a) Deliveroo, (b) Uber Eats and (c) Just Eat to end the contracting-out of their workforce accounts for use by people illegally working in the UK. Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) The Government is alert to the risks associated with substitution in the platform economy, particularly the role it can play in facilitating illegal working by irregular migrants.
I met recently with the Minister for Border Security and Asylum and the Director of Labour Market Enforcement to discuss this.
We are looking closely at the extent to which Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat have implemented the commitments they made earlier this year to implement systems to conduct right to work checks on substitute riders, and I have recently written to them seeking further detail on how this is operating in practice. |
Almshouses: Social Rented Housing
Asked by: Neil Coyle (Labour - Bermondsey and Old Southwark) Monday 6th January 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what steps her Department is taking to ensure almshouse providers who do not have 1,000 homes but are willing to become registered social landlords are able to do so. Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) As part of the recent consultation on proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework, the government sought views on whether changes were needed to the definition of ‘affordable housing for rent’ to make it easier for organisations that are not Registered Providers, including almshouses, to develop new affordable homes. While the government are committed to making it easier for almshouses to develop new affordable homes, we ultimately decided against extending the definition to capture almshouses for the reasons set out in our response to the consultation which can be found on gov.uk here. Informed by the points raised in the consultation, the government will actively explore options in future changes to national policy related to decision making. For those landlords who wish to register with the Regulator of Social Housing, there is no bar to registration because of size. Registered providers of social housing must meet standards that ensure tenants live in homes that are good quality and well-maintained and that landlords are well-managed and remain financially viable. The Regulator is operationally independent and has designed a registration process that seeks to ensure providers are able to meet its standards once registered. |
Almshouses: Affordable Housing
Asked by: Neil Coyle (Labour - Bermondsey and Old Southwark) Monday 6th January 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, if she will take steps to allow almshouses to secure funding as affordable housing providers. Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government) As part of the recent consultation on proposed reforms to the National Planning Policy Framework, the government sought views on whether changes were needed to the definition of ‘affordable housing for rent’ to make it easier for organisations that are not Registered Providers, including almshouses, to develop new affordable homes. While the government are committed to making it easier for almshouses to develop new affordable homes, we ultimately decided against extending the definition to capture almshouses for the reasons set out in our response to the consultation which can be found on gov.uk here. Informed by the points raised in the consultation, the government will actively explore options in future changes to national policy related to decision making. For those landlords who wish to register with the Regulator of Social Housing, there is no bar to registration because of size. Registered providers of social housing must meet standards that ensure tenants live in homes that are good quality and well-maintained and that landlords are well-managed and remain financially viable. The Regulator is operationally independent and has designed a registration process that seeks to ensure providers are able to meet its standards once registered. |
MP Financial Interests |
---|
9th December 2024
Neil Coyle (Labour - Bermondsey and Old Southwark) 2. Donations and other support (including loans) for activities as an MP Michael Yates - £4,500.00 Source |
Parliamentary Debates |
---|
Business without Debate
0 speeches (None words) Monday 16th December 2024 - Commons Chamber |