Lords division · 27 Apr 2026 · No. 4

English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill

Baroness McIntosh of Pickering moved Motion E1, as an amendment to Motion E, at end to insert “, and do propose Amendments 94F and 94G in lieu—94F After Clause 63, insert the following new Clause—“Protection for existing businesses and facilities from unreasonable restrictions on noise emissions resulting from new developmentsAfter Section 70D of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, insert the following new section—“70E Protection for existing businesses and facilities from unreasonable restrictions on noise emissions resulting from new developments(1) A development that is the subject of an application for planning permission is an “noise-sensitive development” if residents or occupiers of the development are likely to be affected by significant impact from existing noise in the vicinity of the development.(2) Without prejudice to the generality of section 70(1), a planning authority—(a) must, when considering under section 70 whether to grant planning permission for a noise-sensitive development subject to conditions, take particular account of whether the development includes sufficient measures to mitigate, minimise or manage the effect of the anticipated noise of existing activities on the development from any existing cultural venues or facilities (including in particular, but not limited to, live music venues), or dwellings or businesses in the vicinity of the development, and(b) may not, as a condition of granting planning permission for a noise-sensitive development, impose on existing cultural venues or facilities additional costs relating to design measures to mitigate, minimise or manage the effects of that noise.””94G Clause 92, page 88, line 21, at end insert—“(z1) section (Protection for existing businesses and facilities from unreasonable restrictions on noise emissions resulting from new developments) (protection for existing businesses and facilities from unreasonable restrictions on noise emissions resulting from new developments);””The House divided:

At a glance The Not Contents won by a margin of 80 votes. The Government's position was Not Content, and it won.

How the parties voted

The party breakdowns are our own analysis of the official voting records (recorded votes only; they do not describe the formal whip). How we work this out.

Peers attend divisions ad hoc, so there is no did-not-vote list. Tellers are counted in the Content and Not Content totals, unlike in the Commons.

Tellers: Lord Freyberg (Content), Lord Addington (Content), Lord Kennedy of Southwark (Not Content), Baroness Wheeler (Not Content).

Every vote

No members match your search.

Source: the official Lords division record.