Asked by: Viscount Younger of Leckie (Conservative - Excepted Hereditary)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of how many individuals, broken down by age group and region, are recorded as unemployed on the according to the labour force survey but are not captured in the universal credit unemployed caseload because they are (1) ineligible, (2) supported by savings or partner income, (3) recently unemployed with very short spells, or (4) otherwise not claiming benefits.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Information on the number of unemployed people by age and region is published and available at Nomis - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics and in the attached spreadsheet.
Published information on Universal Credit Searching for Work by age and region is available at Stat-Xplore - Log in and in the attached spreadsheet.
Information on the Clamant Count of unemployment-related benefits is published and available at - Nomis - Official Census and Labour Market Statistics and in the attached spreadsheet.
The ONS also publish statistics on estimates of the patterns of work and worklessness amongst household – which are published and can be found here - Working and workless households in the UK - Office for National Statistics, though no age and region split is available
Not every ILO unemployed jobseeker is in receipt of Universal Credit or Jobseekers Allowance or expected to be. Some may be ineligible. Some may be eligible but choose not to claim unemployment-related benefits.
People in employment on low earnings; unemployed people and certain groups amongst the economically inactive can all claim Universal Credit.
The Claimant Count of people on unemployment-related benefits (UC searching for work conditionality and JSA) fell by 30,000 in the year to January 2026.
No independent analysis of benefit uptake among newly unemployed individuals has been commissioned by the Department.
The Income-related benefits: estimates of take-up: release strategy, last updated in October 2025, and the Department for Work and Pensions statistical work programme, outline that a measure to assess Universal Credit (UC) and income related legacy benefit take-up for the working-age population is currently under development by the department.
We are aiming to achieve our long-term ambition of an increased employment rate by reforming the system to enable greater participation, progression and productivity in the labour market.
This agenda is key to delivering economic growth and rising living standards. It requires action to: reverse the trend of rising economic inactivity; support people into good quality work; help people to get on in work and increase their earnings; and develop the skilled workforce that key sectors need to grow.
In November 2024, we set out our plan in the Get Britain Working White Paper, with three pillars:
Asked by: Baroness Thomas of Winchester (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to issue updated guidance to caseworkers about the administration of the Access to Work scheme to ensure consistency across the UK; and if so, when they plan to issue that updated guidance.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
To improve consistency, we have introduced training focused on embedding the Access to Work scheme’s principles more clearly. This includes a stronger emphasis on employers’ responsibilities under the Equality Act, ensuring support is awarded in a fair and balanced way.
We have also increased the number of staff working in Access to Work by c.29% and streamlined some processes to improve the service.
We are committed to improving the service and will utilise the outcomes of the Green Paper consultation, the Collaboration Committees, and upcoming work of the Independent Disability Advisory Panel to inform the future direction of Access to Work. Once established we will consider timelines and work closely with stakeholders to ensure an appropriate transition. We continue to review our operational practices and resources, to drive improvements across the service to reduce processing times and the overall experience of our customers.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government what proportion of people who use the Access to Work scheme for mental health support have a diagnosed condition.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The information requested is not held centrally and extracting this information would require manual examination of individual records and exceed the cost limit.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government how much has been spent on mental health support as part of the Access to Work scheme in each of the past five years, broken down by mental health condition.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.
Although the Department holds information on the mental health conditions of Access to Work customers and the specific types of support they receive, information on specific mental health conditions and how much has been spent on mental health support is not readily accessible. The required information is recorded as descriptive free-text information and extracting it would require manual review of individual records.
While we cannot provide total expenditure on mental health support, the Access to Work official statistics do report expenditure for customers whose primary medical condition is a mental health condition, as well as for the Mental Health Support Service, as seen in the table below.
£m, 2024/25 prices | 2020/21 | 2021/22 | 2022/23 | 2023/24 | 2024/25 |
Mental Health Condition | 5.9 | 12.2 | 17.4 | 27.7 | 38.7 |
Mental Health Support Service | 7.1 | 7.7 | 9.4 | 11.5 | 11.9 |
Asked by: Lord Bird (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government how the extra costs incurred by disabled people, including for (1) equipment, (2) care, (3) transport, and (4) housing, are accounted for in poverty metrics and support provision.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
A range of poverty measures are included in the annual Households Below Average Income Statistics including Relative Low Income (After Housing Costs) and Material Deprivation. Relative Low Income involves setting a threshold based on 60% of net household income after deducing taxes and housing costs. It does not take account of any additional costs incurred due to disability. Material Deprivation involves asking families whether they can afford a set of essential items so the impact of any additional costs due to disability could impact on a family’s ability to afford these items so Material Deprivation metric does take account of these costs.
The extra costs disability benefits, including Personal Independence Payment (PIP), provide a contribution towards the extra costs (which includes equipment, care, transport and housing), that may arise from a long-term disability or health condition.
Asked by: John McDonnell (Labour - Hayes and Harlington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate his department has made of the number of Disabled people who have lost employment due to delays or reductions in Access to Work support.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Department does not collect such data as the programme only supports people in, or about to start, employment.
Asked by: Lorraine Beavers (Labour - Blackpool North and Fleetwood)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department is taking to help ensure that constituents who are partnered with trained assistance dogs can access public spaces.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
No one should be refused access to businesses, services or public spaces because they legitimately have an assistance dog.
Strong protection already exists in the Equality Act 2010, which places a duty on businesses and service providers to make reasonable adjustments to improve disabled people’s access to goods and services so they are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled people. This reasonable adjustment duty is an anticipatory duty, meaning that those who provide goods, facilities and services to members of the public are expected to anticipate the reasonable adjustments that disabled customers may require, including auxiliary aids.
This could include allowing the use of assistance dogs so that disabled customers have the same access to goods and services and are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled customers.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), a public body responsible for enforcing the Equality Act, has published guidance for all businesses, including service providers, on this subject. The guidance explains that assistance dogs should be treated as auxiliary aids and not as pets. The guidance makes clear that businesses and service providers should allow assistance dogs access to buildings where dogs would normally not be permitted whenever this is reasonable.
Asked by: Lorraine Beavers (Labour - Blackpool North and Fleetwood)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will commission a review of the (a) clarity and (b) consistency of legislation relating to disabled people with assistance dogs.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
No one should be refused access to businesses, services or public spaces because they legitimately have an assistance dog.
Strong protection already exists in the Equality Act 2010, which places a duty on businesses and service providers to make reasonable adjustments to improve disabled people’s access to goods and services so they are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled people. This reasonable adjustment duty is an anticipatory duty, meaning that those who provide goods, facilities and services to members of the public are expected to anticipate the reasonable adjustments that disabled customers may require, including auxiliary aids.
This could include allowing the use of assistance dogs so that disabled customers have the same access to goods and services and are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled customers.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), a public body responsible for enforcing the Equality Act, has published guidance for all businesses, including service providers, on this subject. The guidance explains that assistance dogs should be treated as auxiliary aids and not as pets. The guidance makes clear that businesses and service providers should allow assistance dogs access to buildings where dogs would normally not be permitted whenever this is reasonable.
Asked by: Lorraine Beavers (Labour - Blackpool North and Fleetwood)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing a statutory definition for assistance dogs.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
No one should be refused access to businesses, services or public spaces because they legitimately have an assistance dog.
Strong protection already exists in the Equality Act 2010, which places a duty on businesses and service providers to make reasonable adjustments to improve disabled people’s access to goods and services so they are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled people. This reasonable adjustment duty is an anticipatory duty, meaning that those who provide goods, facilities and services to members of the public are expected to anticipate the reasonable adjustments that disabled customers may require, including auxiliary aids.
This could include allowing the use of assistance dogs so that disabled customers have the same access to goods and services and are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to non-disabled customers.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), a public body responsible for enforcing the Equality Act, has published guidance for all businesses, including service providers, on this subject. The guidance explains that assistance dogs should be treated as auxiliary aids and not as pets. The guidance makes clear that businesses and service providers should allow assistance dogs access to buildings where dogs would normally not be permitted whenever this is reasonable.
Asked by: Liz Jarvis (Liberal Democrat - Eastleigh)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of regulatory protections against occupational exposure to respirable crystalline silica; whether he plans to review workplace exposure limits and enforcement arrangements in high-risk sectors including construction, stone working and manufacturing; what guidance has been issued to the Health and Safety Executive on inspections of workplaces where engineered stone or other high-silica materials are processed; what arrangements are in place to monitor the respiratory health of workers in occupations with elevated exposure risks; what support is available through Government schemes for workers diagnosed with silicosis linked to workplace exposure; and what further steps he will take to restrict or regulate engineered stone products with high crystalline silica content.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Great Britain has a well-established regulatory framework under the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 2002 (as amended) (COSHH) that requires employers to control exposure to substances that can cause ill health, such as respirable crystalline silica (RCS). Under this framework the risk of exposure to RCS can be properly managed using recognised control measures meeting well established standards. This framework also requires the effectiveness of controls to be maintained and workers trained to use such controls. Employers must also ensure that employees who are, or are liable to be, exposed to RCS are under suitable health surveillance.
The current workplace exposure limit (WEL) for RCS has been in place in Great Britain since 1st October 2006. It provides a long-term exposure limit of 0.1 mg/m3. In 2020, the EU adopted the same limit as Great Britain. COSHH also requires that, regardless of any limit set for RCS, dutyholders must continuously strive to control exposure in line with the principles of good practice, as defined in Schedule 2A of the regulations. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has no plans to review the WEL for RCS.
HSE is taking a multi-phase approach to address the risk of silicosis from working with engineered stone. This includes inspection and enforcement activity combined with targeted research, the publication of guidance, and engagement with suppliers, trade associations, and other representative bodies. HSE inspectors make proportionate enforcement decisions that can include provision of advice, service of enforcement notices and prosecution, in line with HSE’s Enforcement Policy Statement and Enforcement Management Model.
In January 2025, HSE published guidance for installers of stone worktops and anyone who cuts or works with stone, outlining the steps necessary to control exposure risks. This guidance emphasises the importance of competent, trained staff and safe processes. Multi-lingual guidance has also been published for workers exposed to RCS. (https://workright.campaign.gov.uk/artificial-stone/).
The COSHH regulations require employers to ensure that employees who are, or are liable to be, exposed to RCS are under suitable health surveillance. The current health surveillance guidance states that if there is a risk of developing conditions, such as accelerated silicosis, the timing and performance of health surveillance should be adapted with suitable timescales if there is history of significant over-exposure to RCS.
HSE has not proposed restriction on the use of engineered stone as silica is a naturally occurring material and natural stone can have similar RCS content to engineered stone, as such restricting the use of engineered stone does not remove the risk to stoneworkers. HSE has undertaken research to investigate the use of lower silica products and is confident that lower silica products are as useable as high silica content products and pose a lower risk for workers. The range of lower silica products on the market has continued to increase and the take up of these low alternatives is growing reinforced by the wider sharing and promotion of HSE ’s research results and regulatory expectations for exposure control with trade associations, suppliers and employers.
People diagnosed with silicosis may be eligible to claim Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (IIDB). Silicosis is recognised as an industrial disease, and the level of benefit awarded is based on an assessment of the individual's degree of disablement by an independent medical professional. In some cases, additional allowances may also be available depending on individual circumstances.
Where the entitlement criteria are met, individuals may also be eligible for a lump‑sum payment under the Pneumoconiosis etc. (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979, which provides further financial support for people with certain dust‑related diseases, including silicosis.