Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed grouped question UIN question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1655155

registered interest
date	25/07/2023
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	NatWest
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask His Majesty's Government what guidance, if any, they give to the management of NatWest about their expectations, in managing their 38.6% shareholding in that company.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL9693
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/08/2023 answer text <p>The Government’s 38.6% shareholding in NatWest Group is managed at arm’s length and on a commercial basis by UK Government Investments (UKGI). UKGI’s role is to manage the shareholding, not the bank itself. As a shareholder in NatWest, the government does not intervene in the operational decisions of NatWest. NatWest’s board is responsible for the bank’s strategic and operational decisions.</p><p> </p><p>As set out at Budget, the Government intends to exit its shareholding by 2025-26 subject to market conditions and achieving value for money for taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>The Government does have wider responsibilities for financial services regulation. As a matter of public policy, the Government has been clear that it is wrong to remove someone's bank account on the basis of their lawfully-held views, and the Economic Secretary to the Treasury reiterated that message on Wednesday 26 July with leaders from the banking and building society sector.</p><p> </p><p>The Government notes NatWest Group’s confirmation, on 25 July 2023, that they will be conducting an independent review into account-closure arrangements, and that, upon completion, the findings of that review will be made public<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>.</p><p> </p><p>[1] https://www.natwestgroup.com/news-and-insights/news-room/press-releases/our-updates/2023/jul/update-from-natwest-group-board-and-chief-executive-officer.html</p> answering member printed Baroness Penn grouped question UIN HL9694 HL9695 HL9696 question first answered 08/08/2023 10:50:03 answering member 4726 label Biography information for Baroness Penn
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1655156

registered interest
date	25/07/2023
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Nigel Farage
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask His Majesty's Government whether, as 38.6% shareholders in NatWest, they will request the company to investigate the briefings provided to the BBC about the alleged financial position of Nigel Farage.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL9694
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/08/2023 answer text <p>The Government’s 38.6% shareholding in NatWest Group is managed at arm’s length and on a commercial basis by UK Government Investments (UKGI). UKGI’s role is to manage the shareholding, not the bank itself. As a shareholder in NatWest, the government does not intervene in the operational decisions of NatWest. NatWest’s board is responsible for the bank’s strategic and operational decisions.</p><p> </p><p>As set out at Budget, the Government intends to exit its shareholding by 2025-26 subject to market conditions and achieving value for money for taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>The Government does have wider responsibilities for financial services regulation. As a matter of public policy, the Government has been clear that it is wrong to remove someone's bank account on the basis of their lawfully-held views, and the Economic Secretary to the Treasury reiterated that message on Wednesday 26 July with leaders from the banking and building society sector.</p><p> </p><p>The Government notes NatWest Group’s confirmation, on 25 July 2023, that they will be conducting an independent review into account-closure arrangements, and that, upon completion, the findings of that review will be made public<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>.</p><p> </p><p>[1] https://www.natwestgroup.com/news-and-insights/news-room/press-releases/our-updates/2023/jul/update-from-natwest-group-board-and-chief-executive-officer.html</p> answering member printed Baroness Penn grouped question UIN HL9693 HL9695 HL9696 question first answered 08/08/2023 10:50:03 answering member 4726 label Biography information for Baroness Penn
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1655157

registered interest
date	25/07/2023
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	Nigel Farage
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, given their 38.6% shareholding in NatWest, of the descriptions of the “purpose” and “values” of NatWest in the papers released to Nigel Farage.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL9695
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/08/2023 answer text <p>The Government’s 38.6% shareholding in NatWest Group is managed at arm’s length and on a commercial basis by UK Government Investments (UKGI). UKGI’s role is to manage the shareholding, not the bank itself. As a shareholder in NatWest, the government does not intervene in the operational decisions of NatWest. NatWest’s board is responsible for the bank’s strategic and operational decisions.</p><p> </p><p>As set out at Budget, the Government intends to exit its shareholding by 2025-26 subject to market conditions and achieving value for money for taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>The Government does have wider responsibilities for financial services regulation. As a matter of public policy, the Government has been clear that it is wrong to remove someone's bank account on the basis of their lawfully-held views, and the Economic Secretary to the Treasury reiterated that message on Wednesday 26 July with leaders from the banking and building society sector.</p><p> </p><p>The Government notes NatWest Group’s confirmation, on 25 July 2023, that they will be conducting an independent review into account-closure arrangements, and that, upon completion, the findings of that review will be made public<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>.</p><p> </p><p>[1] https://www.natwestgroup.com/news-and-insights/news-room/press-releases/our-updates/2023/jul/update-from-natwest-group-board-and-chief-executive-officer.html</p> answering member printed Baroness Penn grouped question UIN HL9693 HL9694 HL9696 question first answered 08/08/2023 10:50:03 answering member 4726 label Biography information for Baroness Penn
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1655158

registered interest
date	25/07/2023
answering body	Treasury
answering dept id	14
answering dept short name	Treasury
answering dept sort name	Treasury
hansard heading	NatWest: Fossil Fuels
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made, given their 38.6% shareholding in NatWest, of the decision by NatWest to give no loans for new oil and gas projects.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL9696
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/08/2023 answer text <p>The Government’s 38.6% shareholding in NatWest Group is managed at arm’s length and on a commercial basis by UK Government Investments (UKGI). UKGI’s role is to manage the shareholding, not the bank itself. As a shareholder in NatWest, the government does not intervene in the operational decisions of NatWest. NatWest’s board is responsible for the bank’s strategic and operational decisions.</p><p> </p><p>As set out at Budget, the Government intends to exit its shareholding by 2025-26 subject to market conditions and achieving value for money for taxpayers.</p><p> </p><p>The Government does have wider responsibilities for financial services regulation. As a matter of public policy, the Government has been clear that it is wrong to remove someone's bank account on the basis of their lawfully-held views, and the Economic Secretary to the Treasury reiterated that message on Wednesday 26 July with leaders from the banking and building society sector.</p><p> </p><p>The Government notes NatWest Group’s confirmation, on 25 July 2023, that they will be conducting an independent review into account-closure arrangements, and that, upon completion, the findings of that review will be made public<sup><sup>[1]</sup></sup>.</p><p> </p><p>[1] https://www.natwestgroup.com/news-and-insights/news-room/press-releases/our-updates/2023/jul/update-from-natwest-group-board-and-chief-executive-officer.html</p> answering member printed Baroness Penn grouped question UIN HL9693 HL9694 HL9695 question first answered 08/08/2023 10:50:01 answering member 4726 label Biography information for Baroness Penn
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1538946

registered interest
date	02/11/2022
answering body	The Senior Deputy Speaker
answering dept id	204
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name	Senior Deputy Speaker (HoL)
hansard heading	Royal British Legion: Fundraising
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker why Remembrance Day poppies are not on sale at Peers' Entrance as in previous years.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL3150
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 03/11/2022 answer text <p>A box of Remembrance Day poppies was placed at Peers’ Entrance on Wednesday 2 November. This was in addition to poppy boxes already placed in the Attendants’ Office off Peers’ Lobby and at Millbank House reception.</p> answering member printed Lord Gardiner of Kimble question first answered 03/11/2022 16:20:30 answering member 4161 label Biography information for Lord Gardiner of Kimble
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1489463

registered interest
date	14/07/2022
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Privy Council
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government which minister made the decision (1) to reduce the size of the Accession Council, and (2) to hold a ballot of Privy Councillors to attend the Council.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL1767
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/07/2022 answer text <p>The decision not to summons all Privy Counsellors to the next Accession Council, and to hold a ballot of Privy Counsellors not eligible to attend on an ex officio basis, was taken with the collective agreement of the Lord President of the Council and Number 10. The Royal Household was also consulted on the basis of this collective advice. This decision-making process is consistent with the decision-making process for previous Accession Councils.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>The decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot for those ineligible to attend on an ex officio basis applies to all Privy Councillors, regardless of their nationality or their usual place of residence.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>St. James’s Palace is the senior Royal Palace in the United Kingdom and the Court of St. James is the Royal Court to which all Realm High Commissioners are accredited. St. James’s Palace has therefore long been agreed to be the most appropriate setting for the Accession Council.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>In any case, Westminster Hall will not be available to host the Accession Council because an intensive and time critical series of works will begin on the Parliamentary estate, including Westminster Hall, as soon as Demise is announced. The purpose of these works is to prepare the estate and surrounding areas for significant elements of ceremonial and procedural activity. Hosting the Accession Council in Westminster Hall would prevent the completion of these critical works, resulting in significant disruption to other national activity.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>Attendance at an Accession Council is not a statutory matter and there is no constitutional requirement to consult Privy Counsellors on any amendments to attendance arrangements.</p><p><strong> </strong></p><p>Decisions on attendance arrangements for future Accession Councils will be taken at the appropriate time.</p><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member printed Lord True question first answered 22/07/2022 13:35:27 answering member 4200 label Biography information for Lord True
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1489464

registered interest
date	14/07/2022
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Privy Council
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot also applies to Privy Councillors from (1) Commonwealth, or (2) other countries.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL1768
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/07/2022 answer text <p>The decision not to summons all Privy Counsellors to the next Accession Council, and to hold a ballot of Privy Counsellors not eligible to attend on an ex officio basis, was taken with the collective agreement of the Lord President of the Council and Number 10. The Royal Household was also consulted on the basis of this collective advice. This decision-making process is consistent with the decision-making process for previous Accession Councils.</p><p>The decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot for those ineligible to attend on an ex officio basis applies to all Privy Councillors, regardless of their nationality or their usual place of residence.</p><p>St. James’s Palace is the senior Royal Palace in the United Kingdom and the Court of St. James is the Royal Court to which all Realm High Commissioners are accredited. St. James’s Palace has therefore long been agreed to be the most appropriate setting for the Accession Council.</p><p>In any case, Westminster Hall will not be available to host the Accession Council because an intensive and time critical series of works will begin on the Parliamentary estate, including Westminster Hall, as soon as Demise is announced. The purpose of these works is to prepare the estate and surrounding areas for significant elements of ceremonial and procedural activity. Hosting the Accession Council in Westminster Hall would prevent the completion of these critical works, resulting in significant disruption to other national activity.</p><p>Attendance at an Accession Council is not a statutory matter and there is no constitutional requirement to consult Privy Counsellors on any amendments to attendance arrangements.</p><p>Decisions on attendance arrangements for future Accession Councils will be taken at the appropriate time.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord True grouped question UIN HL1769 HL1770 HL1771 question first answered 25/07/2022 11:07:20 answering member 4200 label Biography information for Lord True
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1489465

registered interest
date	14/07/2022
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Privy Council
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Accession Council on the death of the Sovereign could be held in Westminster Hall; and if not, why not.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL1769
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/07/2022 answer text <p>The decision not to summons all Privy Counsellors to the next Accession Council, and to hold a ballot of Privy Counsellors not eligible to attend on an ex officio basis, was taken with the collective agreement of the Lord President of the Council and Number 10. The Royal Household was also consulted on the basis of this collective advice. This decision-making process is consistent with the decision-making process for previous Accession Councils.</p><p>The decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot for those ineligible to attend on an ex officio basis applies to all Privy Councillors, regardless of their nationality or their usual place of residence.</p><p>St. James’s Palace is the senior Royal Palace in the United Kingdom and the Court of St. James is the Royal Court to which all Realm High Commissioners are accredited. St. James’s Palace has therefore long been agreed to be the most appropriate setting for the Accession Council.</p><p>In any case, Westminster Hall will not be available to host the Accession Council because an intensive and time critical series of works will begin on the Parliamentary estate, including Westminster Hall, as soon as Demise is announced. The purpose of these works is to prepare the estate and surrounding areas for significant elements of ceremonial and procedural activity. Hosting the Accession Council in Westminster Hall would prevent the completion of these critical works, resulting in significant disruption to other national activity.</p><p>Attendance at an Accession Council is not a statutory matter and there is no constitutional requirement to consult Privy Counsellors on any amendments to attendance arrangements.</p><p>Decisions on attendance arrangements for future Accession Councils will be taken at the appropriate time.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord True grouped question UIN HL1768 HL1770 HL1771 question first answered 25/07/2022 11:07:20 answering member 4200 label Biography information for Lord True
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1489466

registered interest
date	14/07/2022
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Privy Council
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government what consultations were undertaken by the Privy Council with Privy Councillors prior to the decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL1770
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/07/2022 answer text <p>The decision not to summons all Privy Counsellors to the next Accession Council, and to hold a ballot of Privy Counsellors not eligible to attend on an ex officio basis, was taken with the collective agreement of the Lord President of the Council and Number 10. The Royal Household was also consulted on the basis of this collective advice. This decision-making process is consistent with the decision-making process for previous Accession Councils.</p><p>The decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot for those ineligible to attend on an ex officio basis applies to all Privy Councillors, regardless of their nationality or their usual place of residence.</p><p>St. James’s Palace is the senior Royal Palace in the United Kingdom and the Court of St. James is the Royal Court to which all Realm High Commissioners are accredited. St. James’s Palace has therefore long been agreed to be the most appropriate setting for the Accession Council.</p><p>In any case, Westminster Hall will not be available to host the Accession Council because an intensive and time critical series of works will begin on the Parliamentary estate, including Westminster Hall, as soon as Demise is announced. The purpose of these works is to prepare the estate and surrounding areas for significant elements of ceremonial and procedural activity. Hosting the Accession Council in Westminster Hall would prevent the completion of these critical works, resulting in significant disruption to other national activity.</p><p>Attendance at an Accession Council is not a statutory matter and there is no constitutional requirement to consult Privy Counsellors on any amendments to attendance arrangements.</p><p>Decisions on attendance arrangements for future Accession Councils will be taken at the appropriate time.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord True grouped question UIN HL1768 HL1769 HL1771 question first answered 25/07/2022 11:07:21 answering member 4200 label Biography information for Lord True
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick

1489467

registered interest
date	14/07/2022
answering body	Cabinet Office
answering dept id	53
answering dept short name	Cabinet Office
answering dept sort name	Cabinet Office
hansard heading	Privy Council
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold an annual ballot of Privy Councillors only applies to the next meeting of the Accession Council or whether annual ballots will continue thereafter.
tabling member printed	Lord Lamont of Lerwick
uin	HL1771
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 25/07/2022 answer text <p>The decision not to summons all Privy Counsellors to the next Accession Council, and to hold a ballot of Privy Counsellors not eligible to attend on an ex officio basis, was taken with the collective agreement of the Lord President of the Council and Number 10. The Royal Household was also consulted on the basis of this collective advice. This decision-making process is consistent with the decision-making process for previous Accession Councils.</p><p>The decision to reduce the size of the Accession Council and to hold a ballot for those ineligible to attend on an ex officio basis applies to all Privy Councillors, regardless of their nationality or their usual place of residence.</p><p>St. James’s Palace is the senior Royal Palace in the United Kingdom and the Court of St. James is the Royal Court to which all Realm High Commissioners are accredited. St. James’s Palace has therefore long been agreed to be the most appropriate setting for the Accession Council.</p><p>In any case, Westminster Hall will not be available to host the Accession Council because an intensive and time critical series of works will begin on the Parliamentary estate, including Westminster Hall, as soon as Demise is announced. The purpose of these works is to prepare the estate and surrounding areas for significant elements of ceremonial and procedural activity. Hosting the Accession Council in Westminster Hall would prevent the completion of these critical works, resulting in significant disruption to other national activity.</p><p>Attendance at an Accession Council is not a statutory matter and there is no constitutional requirement to consult Privy Counsellors on any amendments to attendance arrangements.</p><p>Decisions on attendance arrangements for future Accession Councils will be taken at the appropriate time.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord True grouped question UIN HL1768 HL1769 HL1770 question first answered 25/07/2022 11:07:21 answering member 4200 label Biography information for Lord True
tabling member	895 label Biography information for Lord Lamont of Lerwick