To match an exact phrase, use quotation marks around the search term. eg. "Parliamentary Estate". Use "OR" or "AND" as link words to form more complex queries.

Keep yourself up-to-date with the latest developments by exploring our subscription options to receive notifications direct to your inbox

Written Question
Forests: Commodities
Monday 16th September 2024

Asked by: Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government when they plan to introduce secondary legislation under Schedule 17 to the Environment Act 2021; and what plans they have to review the regulations once implemented.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

The Environment Act includes provisions to make it illegal for larger businesses operating in the UK to use key commodities that have been grown on land that is illegally occupied or used, but the required secondary legislation to operationalise the scheme was not introduced in the last Parliament. The new Government will set out its approach to addressing the use of forest risk commodities in due course.

Speech in Grand Committee - Wed 11 Sep 2024
Environment and Climate Change Committee Report: An Extraordinary Challenge: Restoring 30 per cent of our Land and Sea by 2030

"It is a pleasure to follow the noble Baroness, Lady Young, and the noble Baroness, Lady Parminter, who was very generous in what she said. I agreed with everything she said—particularly that part.

I congratulate the committee on putting together a really valuable report and will focus, at least initially, …..."
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park - View Speech

View all Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con - Life peer) contributions to the debate on: Environment and Climate Change Committee Report: An Extraordinary Challenge: Restoring 30 per cent of our Land and Sea by 2030
Division Vote (Lords)
11 Sep 2024 - Social Fund Winter Fuel Payment Regulations 2024 - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 143 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 164 Noes - 132
Written Question
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership
Wednesday 11th September 2024

Asked by: Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Conservative - Life peer)

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to carry out a monitoring report of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, including its environmental impact and impact on deforestation; whether they will include opportunities for expert stakeholders to provide their views and evidence; and how often they plan to carry out such a report.

Answered by Baroness Jones of Whitchurch

The Department for Business and Trade intends to cover the UK’s accession to the CPTPP Agreement in a Free Trade Agreement monitoring report. The Department will consider a range of areas for inclusion in this report, including the environment, and it will take account of stakeholder views. The timing of the report will be provided in due course.

Division Vote (Lords)
23 May 2024 - Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 108 Conservative No votes vs 13 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 76 Noes - 111
Division Vote (Lords)
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 201 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 249 Noes - 219
Division Vote (Lords)
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 205 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 263 Noes - 233
Division Vote (Lords)
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 203 Conservative No votes vs 1 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 226
Division Vote (Lords)
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 196 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 209
Division Vote (Lords)
20 Mar 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park (Con) voted No - in line with the party majority and against the House
One of 208 Conservative No votes vs 1 Conservative Aye votes
Vote Tally: Ayes - 285 Noes - 230