Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask His Majesty's Government when they will publish the outcome of their consultation on regulations to be made under section 154A of the Online Safety Act 2023; and when regulations under that section will be laid before Parliament.

Answered by Baroness Lloyd of Effra - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

No consultation on regulations to be made under section 154A of the Online Safety Act has yet been published.

The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology is continuing to work with Ofcom, UKRI, researchers, and service providers to design a framework to provide a means for researchers to access the invaluable data held by tech companies for the purposes of online safety research.

We will provide an update in due course.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government what action they have taken to carry out targeted outreach to increase the number of women in the rail industry.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

The Government continues to work with arm’s length bodies and industry partners to deliver targeted outreach to increase women’s participation in rail careers. This includes early career engagement programmes, apprenticeship pathways, and outreach in schools and universities to promote rail as an appealing career choice.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government what percentage of workers within the rail industry are women; and what steps they are taking to encourage women into that industry.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

According to the National Skills Academy for Rail 2025 Annual Workforce Survey, 18.9 per cent of the UK rail workforce is female.

The rail industry is expanding access for women through school and university outreach, targeted recruitment, improved welfare and facilities and more inclusive policies. There are also industry initiatives to help attract, retain, and progress women into skilled and leadership roles, including apprenticeship schemes and mentoring and leadership programmes from Women in Rail and Rail Unites for Inclusion, which continue to see record engagement.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the number of women who leave the rail workforce before retirement, and (2) the reasons why women leave the industry.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

We do not hold official data on attrition of women in the rail industry. However, industry insights highlight a range of factors that can influence retention including representation in senior roles, inclusive workplace culture and access to flexible or job share opportunities.

Through the creation of Great British Railways, we are actively establishing a more inclusive, modern culture, increasing representation to better attract and retain a diverse workforce.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have made an assessment of why women are less likely to enter the rail industry.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

Yes, working with the industry the Government has assessed the factors influencing women’s participation in the rail industry and has identified areas to broaden participation. Areas include, for example, representation in leadership roles, flexible working patterns and increasing awareness of the range of rail careers available. Research in this area continues to guide the Government’s work with the rail sector to ensure a more diverse and inclusive workforce.

Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to introduce a system to audit water companies in England and Wales.

Answered by Baroness Hayman of Ullock - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Water companies are already subject to statutory audit requirements and regulatory assurance. Large water undertakers are required to publish Annual Performance Reports each year, in line with Ofwat’s Regulatory Accounting Guidance. These must be independently audited and are reviewed by Ofwat as a licence requirement.

The Government is also strengthening existing oversight arrangements. Through the Water (Special Measures) Act, Ofwat has been given powers to reinforce governance requirements and is working to align its governance principles more closely with the UK Corporate Governance Code, including in relation to audit and assurance.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the economic benefits of having an increased number of data centres in the UK.

Answered by Baroness Lloyd of Effra - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

Data centres are foundational infrastructure for a modern, competitive UK economy, enabling the digital services that underpin productivity across numerous sector, from financial services and advanced manufacturing to public services and the creative industries. By enabling artificial intelligence, cloud computing and data intensive services, data centres generate productivity gains across the wider economy and reinforce the UK’s attractiveness as a crucial destination for investment.

Tech UK has estimated that UK data centres contribute £4.7 billion pounds in gross value added each year and support-tens of thousands of high-quality jobs across construction, operations and specialist supply chains. Operational employment is generally highly skilled and well paid, with wider employment supported through demand for electrical engineering, cooling, digital infrastructure and maintenance services.

HMG’s AI Growth Zone programme will unlock significant private investment and secure compute to drive AI growth, supporting high‑value local jobs and skills. HMG will also invest up to £5 million per Growth Zone, working with local areas to design tailored schemes to realise local economic benefits and boost AI adoption in local communities.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Merron on 16 February (HL14349), on what evidence they base the conclusion that including wider societal benefits in vaccination appraisals would disadvantage programmes unable to evidence such benefits; and whether they have carried out a recent assessment of those benefits.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Our approach to decisions about vaccination programmes is informed by expert recommendations and advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). Working closely with the UK Health Security Agency‑based JCVI secretariat, the Department ensures that the cost-effectiveness methodology for assessing vaccination programmes enables the committee to advise on programmes that deliver the greatest health benefit to the greatest number of people.

Understanding the wider impacts of vaccination beyond health benefits is important in making the broader case for investment in vaccines and in encouraging uptake of vaccines amongst those who are offered them, and can be considered in exceptional cases in addition to the cost effectiveness assessment. In recognition of this, the Department strives to remain abreast of work demonstrating the benefits of vaccination to the wider economy.

However, changing the cost-effectiveness methodology itself to consider a broader range of costed benefits runs the risk of unintended consequences for vaccination programmes which cannot robustly demonstrate these benefits.

That is because decisions are required on how best to spend public funds. If wider socio-economic benefits can be robustly demonstrated for some vaccination programmes but not others due to data availability, there is a risk that changing the cost-effectiveness methodology to include wider benefits could result in programmes with high-quality data being considered more valuable. These programmes could therefore be prioritised for funding over other vaccination programmes, not because they deliver greater overall benefit, but because the data on their wider economic impact is more complete.

The potential impact of this, and potential consequences for the vaccine supply market, including vaccine price, would need to be carefully considered and risks properly evaluated, before any systematic change to methodology.