Information between 8th October 2025 - 18th October 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 |
|---|
|
13 Oct 2025 - Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 128 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 138 Noes - 175 |
|
13 Oct 2025 - Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 130 Conservative Aye votes vs 1 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 147 Noes - 189 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 161 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 192 Noes - 239 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Business of the House - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 183 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 211 Noes - 261 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook 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 - 169 Noes - 212 |
|
14 Oct 2025 - Renters’ Rights Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 162 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 204 Noes - 215 |
|
15 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and against the House One of 117 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 139 Noes - 186 |
|
15 Oct 2025 - Public Authorities (Fraud, Error and Recovery) Bill - View Vote Context Baroness Scott of Bybrook voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 163 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 200 Noes - 194 |
| Speeches |
|---|
|
Baroness Scott of Bybrook speeches from: Renters’ Rights Bill
Baroness Scott of Bybrook contributed 4 speeches (1,093 words) Tuesday 14th October 2025 - Lords Chamber Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government |
| Written Answers |
|---|
|
Community Infrastructure Levy
Asked by: Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 16th October 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the administration of the Community Infrastructure Levy following reports that homeowners in some areas have been issued with bills of up to £70,000 for residential extensions and annexes. Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended) make a number of provisions for charging authorities to grant exemptions from the levy. This includes those who extend their own homes or erect residential annexes within the grounds of their own homes. Further information is set out in the CIL guidance. Councils are ultimately responsible for their own decisions on charging and enforcement, but we expect them to consider each case carefully. The government recognises that there are issues with how some exemptions from the levy are working in practice, and is therefore giving serious consideration to these issues as part of our commitment to making the developer contributions system as clear and effective as possible. On routes to challenge or seek review of a CIL calculation, I refer the Noble Baroness to the answer to Question UIN 58857 on 19 June 2025. |
|
Community Infrastructure Levy: Appeals
Asked by: Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 16th October 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to ensure greater transparency and consistency in local authority Community Infrastructure Levy review processes so that homeowners understand their rights to challenge charges. Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended) make a number of provisions for charging authorities to grant exemptions from the levy. This includes those who extend their own homes or erect residential annexes within the grounds of their own homes. Further information is set out in the CIL guidance. Councils are ultimately responsible for their own decisions on charging and enforcement, but we expect them to consider each case carefully. The government recognises that there are issues with how some exemptions from the levy are working in practice, and is therefore giving serious consideration to these issues as part of our commitment to making the developer contributions system as clear and effective as possible. On routes to challenge or seek review of a CIL calculation, I refer the Noble Baroness to the answer to Question UIN 58857 on 19 June 2025. |
|
Community Infrastructure Levy: Appeals
Asked by: Baroness Scott of Bybrook (Conservative - Life peer) Thursday 16th October 2025 Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government: To ask His Majesty's Government what options are available to individuals who believe they have been wrongly charged Community Infrastructure Levy. Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip) The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (as amended) make a number of provisions for charging authorities to grant exemptions from the levy. This includes those who extend their own homes or erect residential annexes within the grounds of their own homes. Further information is set out in the CIL guidance. Councils are ultimately responsible for their own decisions on charging and enforcement, but we expect them to consider each case carefully. The government recognises that there are issues with how some exemptions from the levy are working in practice, and is therefore giving serious consideration to these issues as part of our commitment to making the developer contributions system as clear and effective as possible. On routes to challenge or seek review of a CIL calculation, I refer the Noble Baroness to the answer to Question UIN 58857 on 19 June 2025. |