Information between 13th May 2025 - 2nd June 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 |
---|
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 |
20 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Twelfth 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 |
20 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Twelfth 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 |
20 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Twelfth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 9 Noes - 5 |
20 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Twelfth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 9 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 9 Noes - 5 |
20 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Twelfth sitting) - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 7 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 5 Noes - 7 |
21 May 2025 - Immigration - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 242 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 83 Noes - 267 |
21 May 2025 - Business and the Economy - View Vote Context Luke Murphy voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 246 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 88 Noes - 253 |
22 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 191 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes Tally: Ayes - 195 Noes - 124 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourteenth 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 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourteenth 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 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 - 2 Noes - 10 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 - 4 Noes - 10 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 - 4 Noes - 10 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Fourteenth 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 - 2 Noes - 10 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 |
22 May 2025 - Planning and Infrastructure Bill (Thirteenth 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 |
Written Answers |
---|
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.
|
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 |
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 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 |
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 |
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 |
Wednesday 11th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Smart meters At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Sara Higham - Director of Corporate Affairs at Smart Energy GB Alex Belsham-Harris - Head of Energy Consumer Markets at Citizens Advice Ned Hammond - Deputy Director for Policy at Energy UK At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Penny Brown - Chief Operating Officer at Smart DCC Pil Krogh Tygesen - Energy Counsellor at Embassy of Denmark Simon Elam - Principal Research Fellow at UCL Energy Institute View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 18th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Building support for the energy transition At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Luke Tryl - Executive Director at More in Common Rachel Brisley - Director, Energy and Environment at Ipsos UK Professor Karen Bickerstaff - Professor of Human Geography at University of Exeter and Chair of ACCESS Net Zero Taskforce At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Amanda Grimm - Policy Manager at Community Energy Scotland Claire Chappell - Head of Behaviour Change & Engagement at Climate Action Wales Dr Amanda Slevin - Co-Director, Centre for Sustainability, Equality and Climate Action at Queen's Univeristy Belfast View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 18th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Building support for the energy transition At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Luke Tryl - Executive Director at More in Common Rachel Brisley - Director, Energy and Environment at Ipsos UK Professor Karen Bickerstaff - Professor of Human Geography at University of Exeter and Chair of ACCESS Net Zero Taskforce At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Amanda Grimm - Policy Manager at Community Energy Scotland Claire Chappell - Head of Behaviour Change & Engagement at Climate Action Wales Dr Amanda Slevin - Co-Director, Centre for Sustainability, Equality and Climate Action at Queen's University Belfast View calendar - Add to calendar |
Wednesday 18th June 2025 2:30 p.m. Energy Security and Net Zero Committee - Oral evidence Subject: Building support for the energy transition At 3:00pm: Oral evidence Luke Tryl - Executive Director at More in Common Rachel Brisley - Director, Energy and Environment at Ipsos UK Professor Karen Bickerstaff - Professor of Human Geography at University of Exeter and member of ACCESS Net Zero Taskforce At 4:00pm: Oral evidence Amanda Grimm - Policy Manager at Community Energy Scotland Claire Chappell - Head of Behaviour Change & Engagement at Climate Action Wales Dr Amanda Slevin - Co-Director, Centre for Sustainability, Equality and Climate Action at Queen's Univeristy Belfast View calendar - Add to calendar |