Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the implications of the Houthis' designation as a terrorist organisation by key UK allies, including the United States, Canada and Australia, for the UK's decision not to proscribe the group.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
While we keep the list of proscribed organisations under review, it is the Government’s long-standing position not to comment on whether or not a specific organisation is being considered for proscription. Decisions to proscribe are taken only after a rigorous process in close consultation with operational partners, based on the best available intelligence and a careful assessment against the statutory test set out in the Terrorism Act 2000.
The UK continues to work very closely with our international partners to address shared security threats. Each nation operates under its own legal framework, and any UK decision on proscription must be taken independently by the Home Secretary, in accordance with the Terrorism Act 2000.
The UK remains deeply concerned by the renewed escalation in Yemen. We have been clear in condemning Houthi attacks on Saudi Arabia and the renewed fighting in Yemen, while continuing to call for immediate de-escalation and a return to the UN-led political process.
There can ultimately be no military solution to the conflict. The only sustainable way forward is political and diplomatic, and we remain in close contact with Saudi Arabia, the internationally recognised Government of Yemen and other partners as we work to restore stability and protect regional security.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the then Minister for the Cabinet Office on 20 October 2025 (HC81873), whether there is longer internal guidance or a desk note on the council tax policy other than the cited response to a Parliamentary Question.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The scope of the policy is set out in the response to PQ 81873:
Departments are asked to make their Ministers who are allocated an official residence aware of their relevant responsibilities, in line with the Ministerial Code.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Cabinet Office was aware of the dossier compiled by Christopher Steele on Lord Mandelson (1) before, or (2) after, he was appointed as Ambassador to the United States.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s statement and release of information on 1 June 2026 in response to the Humble Address:
The documents published in the first and second tranches contain the entirety of the documents the Government has available for disclosure, except those being withheld at the request of the Metropolitan Police.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Minister for the Cabinet Office on 8 July (HC15560), whether rejoining Interreg EU has been an item of discussion or negotiation as part of the current EU/UK reset.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement allows for UK participation in EU programmes, with decisions made on a case by case basis and subject to negotiation. We recognise the value of the UK associating to EU programmes where this is in line with the national interest, as demonstrated by our participation in Horizon Europe, Copernicus and the PEACEPLUS programme in Northern Ireland and Ireland. However, participation in Interreg Europe has not been discussed.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 9 July (HL1331), whether the Prime Minister identifies as working class.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The Prime Minister is focused on delivering for working people across the country, no matter where they live or their background.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to investigate the claims by the leader of Reform UK of cyber-hacking by Russian hostile actors.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
I refer the noble Baroness to the answer given by my right honourable friend the Minister, on 8 September 2026 in response to UIN 21221 in the House of Commons:
The Government does not routinely comment on specific security threats. Any National Cyber Security Centre assessments concerning particular individuals or organisations, and any reports it receives, are treated in confidence. The NCSC has published guidance to support political organisations in strengthening their cyber security, available at: https://www.ncsc.gov.uk/collection/defending-democracy/political-organisations.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to establish a Number 10 North in Manchester; and if so, whether this will change the status of Glasgow as the second headquarters of the Cabinet Office; and whether they expect there to be any change to staffing levels in Glasgow and Manchester as a consequence.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
I refer the Noble Lady to the Written Statement provided by Baroness Smith of Basildon on 21 July 2026, HLWS298. No such changes have been made.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent on 20 July (HL1330), whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer intends to publish a tax return on Gov.uk.
Answered by Lord Pitt-Watson - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Publication of tax returns is a matter for individual Ministers. Any such publication would be made in the usual way.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the (1) United States Department of Justice, and (2) White House, relating to the disclosure of redacted Epstein material to UK public bodies to assist with (a) the Government response to the Humble Address and (b) law enforcement in the UK.
Answered by Lord Wood of Anfield - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
I refer the Noble Baroness to the response provided on 2 July to Question 13198 which is copied below:
Decisions on access to documents held by the United States are a matter for the relevant authorities in that country. The Metropolitan Police operates independently of Government and any engagement between UK law enforcement and international counterparts would take place through the appropriate law enforcement channels.
Asked by: Baroness Finn (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Minister for the Cabinet Office on 10 June (HC5973), whether the referenced search parameters included material of a party political nature held by the No. 10 Political Office, or whether documents and emails held by the No. 10 Political Office and its staff were deemed out of scope of the Government response to the Humble Address of 4 February.
Answered by Baroness Twycross - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
I refer the Noble Lady to the Government’s statement and release of information on 1st June, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address, with the relevant passage copied here for ease. The methodological note included in this publication provides a detailed overview of the information gathering process.
Scope of searches
18. In order that the Government could respond swiftly and transparently to discharge the spirit and letter of the Humble Address, search parameters were included based
on the limbs of the Humble Address motion. These were as follows:
a. Individuals in scope of the limbs of the motion seeking direct correspondence with Peter Mandelson (via email and other electronic messages) were specified as all Ministers, Pay Band 3/4 Special Advisers, Permanent Secretaries and Directors General. This was on the basis that these were the individuals most likely to have come into contact with Peter Mandelson.
b. These individuals were instructed to search their work devices and personal devices for any relevant information.
c. Minutes of meetings between those same individuals and Peter Mandelson where they were the principal attendees were requested, not where they were one member among wider cast lists (for example not including formal committee meetings such as the National Security Council).
d. Electronic messages involving Peter Mandelson that were exchanged as part of a group were requested, as well as those directly between an in-scope individual and Peter Mandelson.
19. While commissions to departments did not specifically request invitations to meetings or schedulers from individuals’ calendars, where these have been provided to the Cabinet Office Humble Address team and where relevant, they have been included in the publication.
20. Some material has been included in the publication where it does not meet the above criteria but includes content relevant to areas where Parliament has expressed a significant interest, such as Peter Mandelson’s campaign to become Chancellor of Oxford University. Material of a party political nature is included in the publication, contrary to usual practice and precedent for information ‘held’ by the Government, in order to demonstrate the maximum possible transparency.
21. Some information was deemed out of scope via the commissioning process so as to keep the returns focused on the most relevant information:
a. Obvious ephemera - for example press cuttings, out of office replies, FCDO internal corporate messaging.
b. Anything which was clearly related to the corporate management of British Embassy Washington (e.g. FCDO personnel decisions and discussions, individual performance reporting, embassy staffing and management plans, estate issues).
c. Routine Embassy business (such as consular work and copylists containing FCDO Diplomatic Telegrams, regional updates, thematic notes and briefing materials, press lines, corporate updates and newsletters).
d. Purely personal information that would not usually be considered ‘held’ by the Government (for example relating to family matters or medical information).
22. On 31 March the SRO wrote to Peter Mandelson - via his solicitors - to request any information held on his personal phone. Peter Mandelson declined to comply with this request. The Government has no further recourse to search the personal devices of Peter Mandelson.