Information between 12th March 2023 - 9th February 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 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 308 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 249 Noes - 312 |
21 Mar 2023 - 36. Alcohol duty - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 314 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 321 Noes - 64 |
13 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 308 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 248 |
13 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 306 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 310 Noes - 246 |
21 Mar 2023 - 18. Pensions (lifetime allowance charge and annual allowance) - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 316 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 330 Noes - 233 |
13 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 308 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 312 Noes - 250 |
27 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 302 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 244 Noes - 308 |
28 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 298 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 242 Noes - 309 |
27 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 297 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 301 |
27 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 301 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 196 Noes - 306 |
27 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 301 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 67 Noes - 307 |
28 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 297 Conservative Aye votes vs 0 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 302 Noes - 242 |
28 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 296 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 301 |
28 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 295 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 248 Noes - 299 |
28 Mar 2023 - Illegal Migration Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 296 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 249 Noes - 301 |
29 Mar 2023 - Finance (No. 2) Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 283 Conservative No votes vs 0 Conservative Aye votes Tally: Ayes - 211 Noes - 289 |
22 Mar 2023 - CRIMINAL LAW - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 282 Conservative Aye votes vs 14 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 290 Noes - 14 |
22 Mar 2023 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 288 Conservative Aye votes vs 2 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 296 Noes - 229 |
22 Mar 2023 - Northern Ireland - View Vote Context Jo Churchill voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House One of 281 Conservative Aye votes vs 22 Conservative No votes Tally: Ayes - 515 Noes - 29 |
Parliamentary Debates |
---|
Freehold Management: Service Charges
11 speeches (3,976 words) Thursday 20th April 2023 - Commons Chamber Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government |
Heritage Assets: London
9 speeches (4,189 words) Thursday 23rd March 2023 - Commons Chamber Department for Science, Innovation & Technology |
Written Answers |
---|
Cosmetics: Chemicals
Asked by: Ruth Jones (Labour - Newport West and Islwyn) Thursday 30th March 2023 Question to the Department for Business and Trade: To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to the Answer of 27 April 2022 to Question 157481 on chemicals, what tests have been conducted on imported and ecommerce consumer products for the presence of lysmeral above legal concentration limits. Answered by Kevin Hollinrake - Shadow Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities There have been no changes to the regulatory position of Lysmeral under REACH since the answer given by my Hon. Friend the Member for Bury St Edmunds (Jo Churchill) on 27 April 2022, UIN 157481. That means there are no grounds under REACH for testing for its presence in products.
Lysmeral is a prohibited substance for use in cosmetics under annex II of the Cosmetics Regulations 2009 and has been since December 2022. Enforcement authorities, the Office for Product Safety and Standards and Trading Standards, test products where intelligence dictates the need to do so because, for example, it is suspected that a particular product contains a banned or limited substance. |