Lord Campbell-Savours Portrait

Lord Campbell-Savours

Labour - Life peer

1 APPG membership (as of 25 Aug 2021)
Axial Spondyloarthritis
Services Committee
1st Sep 2016 - 28th Jan 2021
House Committee (Lords)
22nd May 2012 - 31st Aug 2016
Liaison Committee (Lords)
2nd Jun 2010 - 30th Mar 2015
Procedure and Privileges Committee
1st Dec 2011 - 30th Mar 2015
Administration and Works Committee (Lords)
15th Nov 2007 - 1st May 2012
Procedure and Privileges Committee
9th Jun 2010 - 1st Dec 2011
Draft Charities Bill (Joint Committee)
10th May 2004 - 15th Sep 2004
Draft Corruption Bill (Joint Committee)
24th Mar 2003 - 31st Jul 2003
Standards and Privileges
23rd Oct 1996 - 11th May 2001
Agriculture
19th Apr 1994 - 20th May 1996
Public Accounts Committee
27th Apr 1992 - 9th Jun 1993
Public Accounts Committee
1st Feb 1983 - 17th Dec 1991
Procedure Committee
28th Jan 1987 - 5th Dec 1991


There are no upcoming events identified
Division Votes
Wednesday 28th April 2021
National Security and Investment Bill
voted Aye - in line with the party majority
One of 147 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 318 Noes - 241
Speeches
Wednesday 15th September 2021
Council Tax

My Lords, the national framework is flawed. How can a band C house in Cumbria, with council taxes of over …

Written Answers
Thursday 29th July 2021
Immigration: EEA Nationals
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1629), whether …
Early Day Motions
None available
Bills
None available
Tweets
None available
MP Financial Interests
None available

Division Voting information

During the current Parliamentary Session, Lord Campbell-Savours has voted in 125 divisions, and 1 time against the majority of their Party.

11 Jan 2021 - Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Campbell-Savours voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Labour No votes vs 138 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 283
View All Lord Campbell-Savours Division Votes

Debates during the 2019 Parliament

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Lord Bethell (Conservative)
(27 debate interactions)
Baroness Vere of Norbiton (Conservative)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
(16 debate interactions)
Baroness Williams of Trafford (Conservative)
Minister of State (Home Office)
(12 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
Department of Health and Social Care
(27 debate contributions)
Department for Transport
(16 debate contributions)
Home Office
(13 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
View all Lord Campbell-Savours's debates

Commons initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Lord Campbell-Savours, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.

MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.


Lord Campbell-Savours has not been granted any Urgent Questions

Lord Campbell-Savours has not been granted any Adjournment Debates

Lord Campbell-Savours has not introduced any legislation before Parliament

Lord Campbell-Savours has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


89 Written Questions in the current parliament

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
15th Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the answer by Lord True on 14 July (HL Deb, col 1546), whether they will place a copy of any correspondence relating to their expenditure so far on the possible relocation of the House of Lords to York in the Library of the House.

The Prime Minister’s letter to the CEO of the Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority and the CEO of the R&R Sponsor Body, which requests that it give consideration to decant locations outside of London, were deposited in the Libraries of both Houses on 15 July. This letter is also publicly available on the parliamentary website.

The Government is keen to ensure the R&R of the Palace of Westminster delivers best value for money and would like the Sponsor Body to advise Parliament regarding a range of options as part of this process. As per the principle of exclusive cognisance, the location of Parliament is a matter for Parliament itself.

Lord True
Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
8th Jul 2020
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what was the value of each contract awarded to Trimble Manhattan Space Scheduling by the House of Lords administration in each of the last four years.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. Trimble Manhattan Space Scheduling (Trimble) are engaged by Parliament to provide room booking software utilised by the Attendants office in managing meeting and committee rooms.

This contract has been held by the Parliamentary Digital Service (PDS) since 1 August 2012 and to date £95,536 has been spent. It is due to expire on 28 December 2020 and no further spend is expected on this contract.

Spend over the last four years with Trimble:

Financial Year 2016/17 spend - £0;

Financial Year 2017/18 spend - £23,868 (PDS);

Financial Year 2018/19 spend - £11,506 (PDS);

Financial Year 2019/20 spend - £7,956 (PDS).

The only parliamentary contract awarded to Trimble in the last four years is held by the Commons Northern Estate Programme (NEP).

21st Jan 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evidence they will require of disability of persons standing as Police and Crime Commissioners who have disability-related expenses which are not to be included under rules governing candidate spending limits in their proposed secondary legislation.

A candidate does not have to report evidence of their disability in order to use the exemption brought forward by The Police and Crime Commissioner Elections (Amendment) Order 2020. This upholds the confidentiality of the candidate and is consistent with disability exemptions in place for elections across the UK, including UK Parliamentary general elections.

A candidate will need to make an assessment as to whether their disability meets the definition of disability provided in the 2020 Order. This uses the definition of disability contained within the 2010 Equality Act. There is also statutory guidance available on the meaning of disability under the Equality Act which should help candidates undertake this assessment.

Earl Howe
Deputy Leader of the House of Lords
24th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent, if at all, they monitor the information provided by Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in response to questions on (1) grants, and (2) loans, for compliance with their obligations under the General Data Protection Regulation; and if they conduct such monitoring, what assessment they have made as to whether the York and North Yorkshire LEP has complied with its obligations in respect to questions from Askham Bryan College.

All Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) are subject to mid-year and annual performance reviews that consider areas of governance, delivery performance, and strategic impact. The York and North Yorkshire (YNY) LEP was considered to have met the requirements in all three areas following its 2020-21 annual performance review. The delivery assessment took account of YNY LEP’s overall performance in delivering its Local Growth and Getting Building Fund programmes, including progress on the delivery of Askham Bryan projects being funded from these programmes.

In order to provide assurance on the robust stewardship of public funds and to meet governance performance requirements, LEPs are required to develop a local assurance framework that meets the mandatory governance, accountability, and transparency requirements set out in the National Local Growth Assurance Framework.

In so doing, LEPs must put in place appropriate data protection arrangements in line with the Data Protection Act 1998, the General Data Protection Requirements (GDPR), and the Data Protection Act 2018. YNY LEP is the data controller for data they collect including any relating to Askham Bryan College. The LEP should ensure it follows the appropriate procedures and that internal processes are compliant with the legislation.

LEPs are also required to have a legal personality and must abide by the laws and regulations that apply to the legal entity they adopt. YNY LEP is a private company limited by guarantee without share capital.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
22nd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether answers to questions on the use of grants and loans by York and North Yorkshire Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to Askham Bryan College were taken into account in respect of decisions on the allocation of resources to the LEP.

The then York, North Yorkshire, and East Riding (YNYER) Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) received local growth funding of £145.9m awarded in three rounds, announced in July 2014, January 2015, and January 2017. The funds were to be spent between financial years 2015-16 and 2020-21.

Funding awards were based on consideration of local Strategic Economic Plans (SEPs), developed by each LEP. Creating skilled and inspired people was a priority in the YNYER SEP and local growth funding supported investment in agri-tech and land-based engineering facilities at Askham Bryan College, as well as a digital farm hub at the College.

A condition of local growth funding allocations to LEPs was that all projects were subject to business cases that met an agreed local Assurance Framework including representing value for money to the taxpayer, being deliverable, and having a strong strategic fit. All LEP investments and investment decisions are publicly available on LEP websites, as the Assurance Framework requires.

In 2020, the Government announced the £900 million Getting Building Fund (GBF) to deliver jobs, skills, and infrastructure across the country. LEPs and Mayors were invited to propose shovel-ready infrastructure projects that would boost economic growth, and fuel local recovery and jobs. Funding awards were based on a consideration of the strategic fit and deliverability of each project. The £15.4m GBF award for the geographically reformed York and North Yorkshire LEP included support for a Digital Skills Academy at Askham Bryan College, again subject to a business case meeting the requirements of the LEP’s local assurance framework as outlined above.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
22nd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what rules govern the provision of information by Local Enterprise Partnerships on their allocations to grant and loan applicants.

The rules for provision of information by Local Enterprise Partnerships on their allocations to grant and loan applicants are set out in the National Local Growth Assurance Framework, which was published in January 2019.

This Framework provides the Department, Government, stakeholders and the public with the necessary assurances that LEPs have the policies and processes in place to ensure the robust stewardship of public funds. Specifically, it requires LEPs to publish bids and undertake a clear process of recording decisions reached and communicating these in a timely fashion to the applicant.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
25th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Callanan on 21 January (HL11869), with which companies they have entered into any contracts relating to the production of COVID-19 vaccines; and what plans they have to make the terms of those contracts available to the public.

The UK Government has secured early access to 457 million vaccines doses through agreements with eight separate vaccine developers. This includes agreements with BioNTech/Pfizer, University of Oxford/AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline/Sanofi Pasteur, Novavax, Janssen, Valneva, Moderna and CureVac.

In addition to the above, we have also funded fill and finish capability through a contract with Wockhardt in Wrexham, North Wales, as well as the expansion of the Valneva factory in Livingston, Scotland.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
20th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the total number of (1) Oxford/AstraZeneca, and (2) Pfizer/BioNTech, COVID-19 vaccine vials allocated to the UK held in stock in each month in (a) 2019, and (b) 2020.

We have been monitoring the requirements across the supply chain from supplier through to patient for some time. There are clear supply chain plans in place for both the supply and onward deployment of all vaccine candidates. This includes materials, manufacturing, transportation, storage and distribution.

Vaccines and vials are a precious resource in very high demand across the world and therefore for security reasons it is not possible to provide detail about the size of our supplies and exact detail about future deliveries. It should be noted that the UK has a sufficient number of glass vials available, due to orders already placed.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
20th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether their investment in the rapid deployment facility for COVID-19, announced on 17 May 2020, has been allocated; and whether the facility is operational.

The £38 million investment announced on 17 May 2020 has since been revised because it was superseded following supply agreements with vaccine candidates. Therefore, the costs were limited to the equipment and the knowledge transfer. The Government has committed £8.75 million towards the rapid deployment facility which is now operational and manufacturing the University of Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
20th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the estimated vaccine production manufacturing capacity of the Vaccine Manufacturing and Innovation Centre at the Harwell Science and Innovation Campus.

The estimated vaccine production manufacturing capacity of the Vaccines Manufacturing and Innovation Centre will be up to 70 million doses of vaccine within six months, once it has opened.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
20th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they plan to publish the details of the contract they have with AstraZeneca for the supply of 30 million COVID-19 vaccine doses and vials; if so, (a) when, and (b) how; and if not, why not.

Contracts between the Government and companies developing and producing COVID-19 vaccines will be published in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
20th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they plan to publish the details of their contracts with (1) Pfizer/BioNTech for the supply of 30 million MRNA COVID-19 vaccines, (2) Janssen for the supply of 30 million doses  of the AD26COV25 vaccine, (3) GSK Sanofi Pasteur for 60 million doses of the proton adjuvanted vaccine, (4) Novavax for 60 million doses of the NVXCOV2373 vaccines, and (5) Valneva for 60 million doses of the VLA2001 vaccine; if so, (a) when, and (b) how; and if not, why not.

Contracts between the Government and companies developing and producing COVID-19 vaccines will be published in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
11th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what production capacity is available for the (1) manufacture, and (2) supply, of sub-60 degrees freezers in the UK.

The Government has engaged in strategic procurement activity to ensure that we have the necessary ultra-low cold chain capacity needed for the storage and distribution of our portfolio of COVID-19 vaccines.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
7th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the availability of glass vials for COVID-19 vaccine distribution.

The UK has a sufficient number of glass vials available, due to orders already placed.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
7th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have entered into any contracts with (1) Oxford Biomedica, (2) Cobra, and (3) Halix, in relation to the production of COVID-19 vaccines; and, if so, what plans they have to make the terms of these contracts available to the public.

The Government has not entered into a contract with any of the named companies.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what research they have commissioned on the development of a COVID-19 vaccine which can be administered in a single dose.

The Government has invested in a portfolio of COVID-19 vaccines across a range of modalities to secure UK access to the most promising candidates.

The clinical trials of these vaccines involve testing their safety and efficacy across a range of scenarios, including testing efficacy rates of both single and multi-dose delivery methods.

This will ensure the UK has early access to those vaccines that offer the most protection against COVID-19.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy)
1st Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government when Askham Bryan College of York’s application for a grant for a calf and grower teaching building for cattle was (1) submitted, and (2) approved; how much funding was provided; and on what date.

Askham Bryan College’s application for capital funds to support the development of a calf and grower teaching building for cattle was included in the Yorkshire and Humber Institute of Technology proposal which was submitted on 21 November 2018.

The Yorkshire and Humber Institute of Technology proposal was approved on 7 November 2019.

Within the Yorkshire and Humber Institute of Technology proposal, Askham Bryan College were approved to receive £1,746,448 capital funds.

Askham Bryan College have been paid £489,880 to date. The balance of funding, £1,256,568, is due to be paid in this financial year (2021/22).

25th May 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the closure of Askham Bryan College’s Newton Rigg campus in Cumbria; and what discussions they have had with (1) Askham Bryan College, and (2) other bodies, about the closure.

The Further Education Commissioner and the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) carried out a comprehensive analysis of local provision needs for Newton Rigg and the surrounding area in 2020. The core objective of this analysis was to establish if there was a need for college provision within the general vicinity of the Newton Rigg campus. It considered the location of neighbouring further education (FE) colleges in relation to travel to learn options and identified that most enrolments could be accommodated at other statutory FE institutions.

In total, 286 16 to 18 year-old students were enrolled onto land based further education courses at Newton Rigg, of which 70 were in residential accommodation. Where gaps in provision were identified, specifically agricultural provision, alternative arrangements for the next academic year have been agreed with Myerscough College in partnership with Ullswater Community College to ensure continuity of delivery of this provision in the Penrith area after Newton Rigg closes.

Both the Further Education Commissioner and the ESFA continue to have regular meetings with the senior leadership team at Askham Bryan College, and this includes, but is not exclusively related to, matters concerning the closure of Newton Rigg Campus.

During the analysis of local provision needs and subsequently the strategic review, the Further Education Commissioner, with support from the ESFA, has engaged with a significant number of stakeholders who had an interest in Newton Rigg, the implications of its proposed closure and the delivery of FE, including land-based provision within Cumbria. This included Cumbria County Council, Eden District Council, Cumbria Local Enterprise Partnership, all statutory FE colleges located within Cumbria, Scotland’s Rural College, the University of Cumbria, University of Central Lancashire, Lancaster University, National Farmers Union, Friends of Newton Rigg, current and former governors of Askham Bryan College and a range of industry stakeholders.

The strategic review commenced in July 2020 and completed in February 2021. This review engaged with local interested parties and all the educational institutions identified above to ascertain interest and options available to maintain specialist provision at the Newton Rigg campus. No suitable alternative solution was identified to maintain education provision at that site.

22nd Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether the acquisition of Newton Rigg College in Cumbria by Askham Bryan College in York in 2011 met their standards of propriety in public sector procurement; and what plans they have, if any, to review the negotiation process that took place during the acquisition.

Following the decision by the University of Cumbria in 2010, to cease delivering the provision of further education funded by the Skills Funding Agency and the Young People’s Learning Agency, the Skills Funding Agency led an open and competitive procurement process, in accordance with Part B of Schedule 3 of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006, to secure an alternative provider or providers for the delivery of arts provision in Carlisle and predominately land-based provision at Newton Rigg. As a result of this competition, the funding for students studying further education at the University’s Brampton Road building was transferred to Carlisle College, and the funding for students studying further education at Newton Rigg, together with the further education assets at Newton Rigg, was transferred to Askham Bryan College. The procurement was subject to a review by Cabinet Office in 2011 and its findings have been published on gov.uk and are attached.

The successor organisation to the Skills Funding Agency, the Education and Skills Funding Agency now procure provision in accordance with the requirements of the Public Contracts Regulations, 2015. In some circumstances, for example the provision of education and training for young people, separate arrangements apply, but processes and procedures are fair and transparent. Where this applies, we use a mix of local negotiation and tendering appropriate to the circumstances in each case.

22nd Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the abolition of the Northwest Regional Development Agency on 31 March 2012, what plans they have to publish documents previously held by that Agency relating to (1) the Agency’s funding of the University of Cumbria’s acquisition of Newton Rigg College in Cumbria, and (2) the transfer of (a) assets, and (b) land, between Newton Rigg College and the University of Cumbria.

The government has no plans to publish documents concerning the funding and transfer of assets and land relating to the University of Cumbria’s acquisition of Newton Rigg College in 2007.

2nd Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government which Government departments have relationships with Askham Bryan College; and which Department has overall responsibility for policies towards that college.

Askham Bryan College’s primary relationship with government is with the department and its executive agency, the Education and Skills Funding Agency. The department has overall responsibility for policies relating to the delivery of further education and higher education which are provided by Askham Bryan College.

18th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to publish the report of the Newton Rigg Strategic Review undertaken by the Further Education Commissioner Team and which concluded in December 2020.

The Newton Rigg Strategic Review process has been extended. The Further Education Commissioner team and Education and Skills Funding Agency officials are continuing to work closely with stakeholders, including Askham Bryan College, to try and find a solution for retaining some or all of the education provision on the Newton Rigg campus.

Askham Bryan College is independent of the government and is responsible for any decision on Newton Rigg and the associated financial implications.

18th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the Further Education Commissioner Team that undertook the (1) Newton Rigg Strategic Review, and (2) Newton Rigg Review, about publishing any financial planning proposals by Askham Bryan College relating to the viability and future of Newton Rigg college in Penrith.

The Newton Rigg Strategic Review process has been extended. The Further Education Commissioner team and Education and Skills Funding Agency officials are continuing to work closely with stakeholders, including Askham Bryan College, to try and find a solution for retaining some or all of the education provision on the Newton Rigg campus.

Askham Bryan College is independent of the government and is responsible for any decision on Newton Rigg and the associated financial implications.

24th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they made representations on the use of Oxo-Biodegradable plastics to the European Approval Authorities, prior to that body’s decision to ban such products for use in agriculture in favour of bio-based resin from starch and lactic acid based products.

Article 5 of EU Directive 2019/904, on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, introduces a ban on products made from oxo-degradable from being placed on the market within the EU from 3 July 2021. Defra officials were engaged in several fast-paced negotiations in the latter half of 2018 in the lead up to the Directive’s introduction to the European Parliament. The UK Government did not make any separate representations to the European Chemicals Agency regarding oxo-degradable plastics.
Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
23rd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the relative and comparative benefits of bio-based resin from (1) starch, and (2) lactic acid, in biodegradable products used in agriculture, compared to Oxo-Biodegradable plastics.

On 8 April 2021, we published our response to the call for evidence on the need for standards for bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-for-biodegradable-compostable-and-bio-based-plastics-call-for-evidence.

While neither a specific assessment of oxo-biodegradable plastic sheeting used by farmers, nor an assessment comparing bio-based resin from starch and lactic acid in biodegradable products used in agriculture to oxo-biodegradable plastics has been made, the aforementioned call for evidence covered oxo-biodegradable plastics.

The Government response acknowledges that there is currently insufficient evidence demonstrating that oxo-biodegradable plastics perform as claimed and biodegrade, without residue, in a reasonable timeframe in the open environment. We continue to monitor the latest developments and evidence and are keen to see research published in international peer reviewed journals illustrating how these plastics degrade in the marine environment, open environment, and under the soil, specifically under naturalistic conditions, as opposed to experimental models of aging. We also welcome further research on the full environmental impacts of using bio-based plastics.

Over the coming months, we intend to commission a research project to further consider the evidence that has been supplied to the call for evidence within the context of wider literature and new research.

We do not plan to make representations to the European Commission on the usability and safety of oxo-biodegradable products in the farming industry.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
23rd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they intend to make representations to the European Commission on the usability and safety of Oxo-Biodegradable products in the farming industry; and if so, whether they will coordinate those representations with the government of Ireland.

On 8 April 2021, we published our response to the call for evidence on the need for standards for bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-for-biodegradable-compostable-and-bio-based-plastics-call-for-evidence.

While neither a specific assessment of oxo-biodegradable plastic sheeting used by farmers, nor an assessment comparing bio-based resin from starch and lactic acid in biodegradable products used in agriculture to oxo-biodegradable plastics has been made, the aforementioned call for evidence covered oxo-biodegradable plastics.

The Government response acknowledges that there is currently insufficient evidence demonstrating that oxo-biodegradable plastics perform as claimed and biodegrade, without residue, in a reasonable timeframe in the open environment. We continue to monitor the latest developments and evidence and are keen to see research published in international peer reviewed journals illustrating how these plastics degrade in the marine environment, open environment, and under the soil, specifically under naturalistic conditions, as opposed to experimental models of aging. We also welcome further research on the full environmental impacts of using bio-based plastics.

Over the coming months, we intend to commission a research project to further consider the evidence that has been supplied to the call for evidence within the context of wider literature and new research.

We do not plan to make representations to the European Commission on the usability and safety of oxo-biodegradable products in the farming industry.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
23rd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to appoint an independent commission free of all commercial connection to evaluate whether Oxo-Biodegradable products used in crop protection are fully biodegradable leaving no residue.

On 8 April 2021, we published our response to the call for evidence on the need for standards for bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-for-biodegradable-compostable-and-bio-based-plastics-call-for-evidence.

While neither a specific assessment of oxo-biodegradable plastic sheeting used by farmers, nor an assessment comparing bio-based resin from starch and lactic acid in biodegradable products used in agriculture to oxo-biodegradable plastics has been made, the aforementioned call for evidence covered oxo-biodegradable plastics.

The Government response acknowledges that there is currently insufficient evidence demonstrating that oxo-biodegradable plastics perform as claimed and biodegrade, without residue, in a reasonable timeframe in the open environment. We continue to monitor the latest developments and evidence and are keen to see research published in international peer reviewed journals illustrating how these plastics degrade in the marine environment, open environment, and under the soil, specifically under naturalistic conditions, as opposed to experimental models of aging. We also welcome further research on the full environmental impacts of using bio-based plastics.

Over the coming months, we intend to commission a research project to further consider the evidence that has been supplied to the call for evidence within the context of wider literature and new research.

We do not plan to make representations to the European Commission on the usability and safety of oxo-biodegradable products in the farming industry.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
23rd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made as to whether Oxo-Biodegradable plastic sheeting used by farmers is fully biodegradable leaving no residue.

On 8 April 2021, we published our response to the call for evidence on the need for standards for bio-based, biodegradable and compostable plastics: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/standards-for-biodegradable-compostable-and-bio-based-plastics-call-for-evidence.

While neither a specific assessment of oxo-biodegradable plastic sheeting used by farmers, nor an assessment comparing bio-based resin from starch and lactic acid in biodegradable products used in agriculture to oxo-biodegradable plastics has been made, the aforementioned call for evidence covered oxo-biodegradable plastics.

The Government response acknowledges that there is currently insufficient evidence demonstrating that oxo-biodegradable plastics perform as claimed and biodegrade, without residue, in a reasonable timeframe in the open environment. We continue to monitor the latest developments and evidence and are keen to see research published in international peer reviewed journals illustrating how these plastics degrade in the marine environment, open environment, and under the soil, specifically under naturalistic conditions, as opposed to experimental models of aging. We also welcome further research on the full environmental impacts of using bio-based plastics.

Over the coming months, we intend to commission a research project to further consider the evidence that has been supplied to the call for evidence within the context of wider literature and new research.

We do not plan to make representations to the European Commission on the usability and safety of oxo-biodegradable products in the farming industry.

Lord Goldsmith of Richmond Park
Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
24th Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the date on which all rules that currently apply to the actions of members of the Lake District National Park Authority were approved by a Secretary of State.

National Park Authority members are selected by constituent local authorities or parish councils or are appointed by the Secretary of State following open competition. All members appointed by the Secretary of State are governed by the Cabinet Office’s Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies. This sets out the personal and professional standards expected from non-executive board members of UK public bodies and forms part of their terms of appointment. The latest version of the Code of Conduct for Board Members of Public Bodies was published on GOV.UK in June 2019 and can found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-conduct-for-board-members-of-public-bodies

16th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evidence they use to inform policy about vehicle (1) speed limits, and (2) emissions; and what assessment they have made of the emissions levels of (a) petrol, and (b) diesel, vehicles between 1,000–3,000cc travelling at a constant speed of 20mph in (i) first gear, (ii) second gear, (iii) third gear, (iv) fourth gear, (v) fifth gear, and (vi) sixth gear.

The aim of speed management is to deliver a balance between safety objectives for all road users and mobility objectives, to ensure efficient travel, as well as environmental and community outcomes. The Department has published guidance designed to make sure that speed limits are appropriately and consistently set while allowing for flexibility to deal with local needs and conditions.

The regulatory emissions tests for type approval of new vehicles are conducted under dynamic rather than constant speeds in order to be more representative of real-world use. The Department does not have specific results for the situations outlined. Transport emission factors are used within the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory to provide information on the emissions of vehicle fleets based upon factors such as their average speed, fuel type and engine capacity. These are also used within the Emissions Factor Toolkit, published by DEFRA, to assist local authorities carrying out assessment of local air quality.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
8th Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of the guidance included in the guideline by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Spondyloarthritis in over 16s: diagnosis and management, published on 28 February 2017.

No specific assessment has been made.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guidelines describe best practice but are not mandatory, although health and care commissioners are expected to take them fully into account.

8th Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to implement the guideline by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Spondyloarthritis in over 16s: diagnosis and management, published on 28 February 2017.

No specific assessment has been made.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guidelines describe best practice but are not mandatory, although health and care commissioners are expected to take them fully into account.

11th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what (1) estimate they made, and (2) audit they undertook, of the potential (a) demand, and (b) availability, of sub-60 degree freezer capacity in the UK prior to the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine rollout in 2020.

Public Health England (PHE) is responsible for the central storage and distribution of ultra-low temperature COVID-19 vaccines. In its preparations to receive vaccines, PHE determined the freezer capacity requirement to support the United Kingdom programme during summer 2020 and secured the freezers against that requirement. These were commissioned and in service before arrival of the vaccine. They provide sufficient storage for approximately five million doses of COVID-19 vaccines which require minus 60 degree Celsius storage or below.

11th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many freezer units capable of sub-60 degree storage of COVID-19 vaccines are available for use by the NHS in (1) England, (2) Northern Ireland, (3) Scotland, and (4) Wales; and where such units are located.

Public Health England has 58 ultra-low temperature freezers which provide sufficient storage for approximately five million doses of COVID-19 vaccines which require minus 60-degree Celsius storage or lower.

The ultra-low temperature freezers are located in two national storage facilities within Great Britain and Northern Ireland, to manage the distribution of COVID-19 vaccines across the four nations. The location of the facilities are not disclosed to maintain the integrity of the sites.

At a regional level the National Health Service has made preparations including sourcing of ultra-low temperature storage to support local delivery.

11th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many pharmacies (1) are currently available, or (2) can be made available, to distribute COVID-19 vaccines in (a) England, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales, and (d) Northern Ireland.

From 14 January, six community pharmacies in England started to offer the COVID-19 vaccination service, with an additional 65 pharmacy-led sites joining from the week commencing 21 January. More pharmacies will be stood up over the coming weeks and months.

The Department, NHS England and NHS Improvement and community pharmacy representative bodies will be working together to establish how community pharmacies’ role could be expanded further in the vaccination programme.

As health is a devolved matter, the commissioning of community pharmacies to provide COVD-19 vaccination in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are decisions for the respective devolved administrations.

7th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the quantity of glass vials that will be needed to distribute COVID-19 vaccines, (2) the capacity to manufacture these vials, and (3) any procurement or delivery issues that may arise.

The procurement of vials is the responsibility of the manufacturer and the United Kingdom Government has actively engaged with each manufacturer regarding manufacturing capacity, procurement and delivery to ensure enough stock is available, providing additional support where required. The UK has a sufficient number of glass vials available, due to orders already placed with manufacturers.

7th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the requirements of the contract they awarded to Wockhardt Ltd, to help in the production of COVID-19 vaccines, are currently being fulfilled.

The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine is currently being filled and finished at the Wockhardt site.

The Government has recently extended Wockhardt’s contract from 18 to 24 months to ensure that we have uninterrupted capability into 2022. Specific details of contract fulfillment are commercially sensitive.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assurances AstraZeneca gave about its commitment to manufacture the Oxford vaccine prior to either (1) a successful testing programme, or (2) approval by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency.

Assurances agreed between the Government and Oxford/AstraZeneca are bound by commercially confidential contracts.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people in total were vaccinated against COVID-19 in the UK using (1) the Oxford/AstraZeneca, and (2) the Pfizer/BioNTech, vaccine in each week since the beginning of 1 December 2020.

The information is not collected in the format requested.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many, and what percentage of the total of, (1) care home residents, (2) care home staff, (3) frontline health workers, and (4) patients over 80, have been vaccinated against COVID-19 in (a) England, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales, and (d) Northern Ireland.

NHS England releases weekly vaccination data which shows that as of 15 April:

- 94.2% eligible residents in older adult care homes in England have received at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine;

- 79.4% eligible staff in older adult resident care homes have received at least their first dose; and

- 95.2% of patients over 80 years old have received at least their first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine.

The percentage of National Health Service trust health care workers who have received at least their first dose is not currently available, as NHS England’s data does not currently include all frontline health workers as a sub-group.

COVID-19 vaccination data for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is not collected centrally in the format requested as this is a devolved matter.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the optimum gap between the first and second dose of (1) the Oxford/AstraZeneca, and (2) the Pfizer/BioNTech, COVID-19 vaccine for securing the longest period of protection against COVID-19.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA’s) Information for Healthcare Professionals regarding the Pfizer vaccine states that a second dose of it should be given at least 21 days after the first dose. For the AstraZeneca vaccine, the Information for Healthcare Professionals states that the second dose should be given between four and 12 weeks after the first dose. This advice is based on clinical trial data and other information submitted to MHRA by the manufacturer.

Based on trial data showing the effectiveness of both vaccines, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) advised that both vaccines should be given up to 12 weeks apart. The JCVI also advised that priority should be given to having a greater number of people given a first dose, which would have a greater public health impact than prioritising second doses.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what administrative arrangements are in place to ensure that people comply with the requirement to receive a second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine; and what information is being retained as to the identity of those who do not receive a second dose of a vaccine having been scheduled to do so.

The United Kingdom operates a system of informed consent for vaccinations. When advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation informed changes to the timings of the secondary dose, general practitioners (GPs) were asked to rebook the appointments. Vaccination centres book in appointments with individuals for both the first and second dose at the same time. Additionally, vaccinations are noted in GP health records and the National Immunisation Management System, which can be accessed by the national booking service to follow up on any missed second doses.

Previous incomplete vaccinations, where the course has been interrupted or delayed, should be resumed using the same vaccination. However, the first dose should not be repeated.

6th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the duration of protection from COVID-19 provided by (1) the Oxford/AstraZeneca, and (2) the Pfizer/BioNTech, vaccine; and what estimate they have made of the length of time a person who receives (a) only a first dose, and (b) two doses, of (i) the Oxford/AstraZeneca and (ii) the Pfizer/BoNTech, vaccine is protected from COVID-19.

The total length of protection from vaccines against COVID-19 is not yet fully understood. Vaccine developers and manufacturers continue to collect data on the performance of their vaccines. Through their surveillance strategy Public Health England (PHE) continues to assess the effectiveness of vaccines, including duration of protection. A copy of PHE’s COVID-19 vaccine surveillance Strategy is attached.

On 26 January the Joint Committee on Vaccine and Immunisation (JCVI) published an online report, Optimising the COVID-19 vaccination programme for maximum short-term impact. The report found that short-term vaccine efficacy from the first dose of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine is calculated at around 90% and from the first dose of the Oxford/ AstraZeneca vaccine is calculated at around 70%, with high protection against severe disease.

Given the high level of protection afforded by the first dose, models suggest that initially vaccinating a greater number of people with a single dose will prevent more deaths and hospitalisations than vaccinating a smaller number of people with two doses. The second dose is important to provide longer lasting protection and is expected to be as or more effective when delivered at an interval of 12 weeks from the first dose. The JCVI has based their advice on the assumption that protection from a first dose of either vaccination will wane in the medium term and that a second dose will offer more long term protection.

17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evidence they have from the UK of COVID-19 appearing in blood samples.

Diagnosis of COVID-19 infection has largely been based on reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction amplification of viral nucleic acid (RNA) from upper respiratory tract swabs. However, detection of viral RNA has also been reported in blood, serum and plasma from small clinical case series.

The frequency and quantification of RNA in blood fractions and the significance of blood as a transmission route remains unknown.

17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether there is any evidence of variants of COVID-19 which can be traced to specific countries of origin; and if so, what proportion of reported COVID-19 cases have been linked to the variant of COVID-19 from Italy.

It is common for viruses to mutate - over 4,000 variants of SARS-CoV-2 have been identified worldwide. The United Kingdom has a world leading surveillance system that supports the detection, analysis and identification of any variants circulating globally which may be of concern.

COVID-19 Genomics UK will continue to lead on monitoring virus samples for new variants. The Department and Public Health England will continue to study the virus closely to understand how it is behaving, where it might have originated from and the spread of the new variant across the UK.

17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the article by Giovanni Apolone et al Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy, published in the Tumori Journal on 11 November.

Public Health England monitors the evidence on COVID-19, including articles such as that by Apolone et al.

This published study uses in-house serological methods which require considerable assurance on their specificity and sensitivity, which is not provided in the paper. Therefore, there are several reservations about the laboratory methods used, which provide uncertainty about the conclusions drawn.

Whilst indicative of the possibility, this article is not definitive evidence of the presence of COVID-19 virus in Italy in December and additional supportive evidence is required to achieve high confidence in this assertion.

17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have had any discussions with the World Health Organization (WHO) about when the governments of (1) Italy, and (2) France, first reported the emergence of COVID-19 to WHO; if so, when in (a) 2019, and (b) 2020, any such emergence was reported by those countries; what assessment they have made of reports of COVID-19 appearing in waste water in Barcelona in 2019; and when they became aware of any such reports.

The United Kingdom has not had any specific discussions with the World Health Organization on the emergence of COVID-19 in France and Italy. The UK Government received notification of France and Italy’s first COVID-19 cases through the European Early Warning and Response System. France reported its first three COVID-19 cases on 24 January 2020. Italy reported its first two COVID-19 cases on 31 January 2020.


The Government has not made any assessment of reports of COVID-19 appearing in wastewater in Barcelona in 2019. In the UK, a national wastewater surveillance programme was announced on 12 June 2020 by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Scottish and Welsh devolved administrations, focusing on sewage monitoring as part of an advance warning system to detect new outbreaks of COVID-19.

9th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the incidence of vaccinated people being able to pass on COVID-19 to those who have not been vaccinated in the trial COVID-19 vaccination programmes.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

9th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government for how long a person who has received the two-doses of the COVID-19 vaccine required under the vaccination protocols can remain asymptomatic.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

9th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether a person who has been vaccinated against COVID-19 can acquire COVID-19 asymptomatic status without indicators and transmit the virus on to another person who has not been vaccinated.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

9th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether (1) an adenovirus vector, and (2) an mRNA, COVID-19 vaccine (a) does not prevent a vaccinated person from contracting COVID-19 but suppresses the symptoms of the disease, or (2) prevents a vaccinated person from contracting COVID-19.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

9th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government how effective (1) an adenovirus vector, and (2) an mRNA, COVID-19 vaccine is if a person only receives one of the two doses required under the vaccination protocols.

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has recommended that as many people on the JCVI’s priority list as possible should be offered a first vaccine dose as the initial priority. One dose of the vaccine offers important protection and allows us to reach as many at risk people as possible in order to offer protection until the second dose can be administered. All individuals will subsequently receive a second dose in due course.

It can be assumed that protection from the first dose will require boosting in order to provide more durable protection. The JCVI supports a two-dose vaccine schedule for the Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca vaccines.

8th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent (1) an appropriate person, or (2) the appropriate authorities, can monitor what will happen if a person only receives one of the two doses required of a COVID-19 vaccine under the vaccination protocols; and what the process will be for following up on those people.

General practice providers are responsible under the Enhanced Service Specification: COVID-19 vaccination programme 2020/21 for using existing local systems to undertake local call and recall. They use nationally determined text where available, identifying and inviting all eligible patient cohorts on their registered list to book vaccination appointments. Primary Care Network sites will be responsible for checking that all eligible patients have an appointment and recall invitation or re-contacting the patients where they have not. A booking reminder will be sent before each appointment for dose one and dose two of the vaccine.

8th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the COVID-19 planned for use vaccines prevent those vaccinated from transmitting the disease.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

8th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent a person who receives only one dose of (1) an adenovirus vector, or (2) an mRNA, COVID-19 vaccination is (a) vulnerable to COVID-19 themselves, and (b) able to transmit the disease on to a second person.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

8th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent a person who completes a two-dose course of (1) an adenovirus vector, and (2) an mRNA, COVID-19 vaccination remains (a) vulnerable to COVID-19 themselves, and (b) able to transmit the disease on to a second person.

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

8th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government for how long a person who has received the two-doses of the COVID-19 vaccine required under the vaccination protocols is able to transmit COVID-19 on to a second person

To date the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), as well as independent expert advisors on the Commission on Human Medicines and its Expert Working Groups, have completed the assessment of the quality, safety and efficacy data only for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine. This vaccine is an mRNA vaccine and data supported a two dose regimen. Efficacy was evaluated in terms of prevention of COVID-19 caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, in terms of vulnerability to COVID-19 of the person vaccinated. Clinical trial data showed that, compared to the placebo, efficacy of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine from first COVID-19 occurrence from seven days after dose two in participants with or without evidence of prior infection with SARS-CoV-2 was 94.6% - a 95% credible interval of 89.9% to 97.3%).

There is currently no data available regarding transmission of COVID-19 to others in a person who has been vaccinated using any of the COVID-19 vaccines. There is also currently no data available for any COVID-19 vaccine on the period after vaccination for which a person can remain asymptomatic.

1st Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the studies published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the University of Sydney and China Agricultural University on the G4 influenza virus.

The article Prevalent Eurasian avian-like H1N1 swine influenza virus with 2009 pandemic viral genes facilitating human infection published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on 29 June 2020 describes a surveillance study of pigs in slaughterhouses and a veterinary hospital in China carried out between 2011 and 2018.

Of the 30,934 samples from 10 different provinces, 165 tested positive for the Eurasian-avian (EA) like H1N1 swine influenza. Of those testing positive, 77 were selected for genetic sequencing, and 29 were identified as having the Genotype 4, described by the authors. The use of a ferret model indicated that the Genotype 4 virus can infect and transmit.

A serological study (analysis of antibodies in the blood) of farm workers on 15 farms over the period of the study, suggests that approximately 10-12% of farm workers had detectable, specific antibody to G4 H1N1 viruses, indicative of previous infection. The publication is not clear if these were farms that were directly related to the surveillance programme. It would also not be possible to determine when these infections occurred.

The New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group is reviewing the risk associated with the genotype 4 (G4) reassortant Eurasian avian-like (EA) H1N1 virus, described in this publication.

1st Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they are monitoring (1) the prevalence, and (2) the pandemic potential, of the G4 influenza virus.

We continually assess the most significant threats that the United Kingdom and its citizens could face, including natural hazard risks such as a pandemic influenza.

The Government continues to review and improve surveillance for potentially zoonotic and new and emerging infections, with early detection through horizon scanning and epidemic intelligence activities, research, and continually improving diagnostic techniques for the identification of zoonotic pathogens.

In line with our standard practice, Public Health England is undertaking a risk assessment of the G4 influenza virus and we will take any appropriate action based on robust scientific and clinical advice.

23rd Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent the 'R' rate for COVID-19 includes an assessment of the number of people who self-treat at home with no hospital or emergency services intervention.

R is estimated by a number of independent modelling groups based at universities and Public Health England. Evidence from the different models is considered, discussed, combined, and then a consensus estimate is presented to the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies as a range.

Individual modelling groups use a variety of different data sources to estimate R. This includes epidemiological data such as the number of hospital admissions and deaths, and surveys that gather information on the behaviour of individuals. The models include assumptions about numbers of individuals who require no health service intervention which are informed by a range of studies including household infection surveys.

23rd Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to either local or national sponsored initiatives for the UK-manufacture of masks to protect against COVID-19.

The Government is building up United Kingdom manufacturing with signed contracts to manufacture over two billion items of personal protective equipment (PPE) through UK-based manufacturers, including facemasks, visors, gowns and aprons.

Lord Deighton is leading the Government effort by British industry to manufacture PPE. The Government is currently in contact with over 350 potential UK manufacturers, and engineering efforts by small companies are being scaled up. We have already taken delivery of products from new, certified UK manufacturers. More new manufacturers of PPE are expected to commit to producing PPE in the coming weeks, with 25 opportunist companies in final commercial discussions.

23rd Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether statistics on testing for COVID-19 undertaken by private companies at the home of people being tested are entered into published statistics.

To provide a more comprehensive response to a number of outstanding Written Questions, this has been answered by an information factsheet Testing – note for House of Lords which is attached, due to the size of the data. A copy has also been placed in the Library

23rd Jun 2020
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what contractual arrangements, if any, exist between the House of Lords room booking service and Trimble Manhattan Space Scheduling.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. Trimble Space Scheduling (TSS), formally Trimble Manhattan Space Scheduling, provide the room bookings software which is used by the House of Lords Attendants’ Office to co-ordinate the bookings of committee rooms and meeting rooms. The software is provided under a contract between the Corporate Officer of the House of Lords and the Corporate Officer of the House of Commons, and Trimble Space Scheduling. The Parliamentary Digital Service has day-to-day responsibility for oversight of arrangements under the contract.

15th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1628 and HL1629), what steps they are taking to inform EU, EEA and EFTA nationals living in the UK about the benefits of the additional rights available to them under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements.

Since the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) opened in March 2019, the Home Office has undertaken a broad range of communications and stakeholder engagement activity to encourage EU, European Economic Area (EEA) and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) nationals, and their family members, to apply for status under the EUSS and to explain why they should do so and secure their rights under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements.

We launched a further wave of UK-wide advertising in mid-May to help ensure they were aware of the EUSS and its benefits and of how to apply and access support in doing so if they needed it, although existing ILR holders need not apply. This built on the successful campaign already delivered – with £7.9 million having now been invested in such activity – with targeted adverts appearing on social media, website banners, catch up TV and radio up to the application deadline of 30 June.

The Home Office has also made available £22 million in grant funding for a network of now 72 organisations across the UK, which includes charities, local authorities and community groups, to engage with vulnerable groups and help them apply to the EUSS.

We are also continuing to engage with local authorities, the Devolved Administrations, employers, community groups and others to raise awareness of the EUSS and encourage those eligible who are yet to apply to do so.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
15th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1628 and HL1629), how they are informing EU, EEA and EFTA nationals who acquired a right of permanent residence in the UK under EU law that (1) they need to apply for status under the EU Settlement Scheme, and (2) the benefits of applying.

Since the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) opened in March 2019, the Home Office has undertaken a broad range of communications and stakeholder engagement activity to encourage EU, European Economic Area (EEA) and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) nationals, and their family members, to apply for status under the EUSS and to explain why they should do so and secure their rights under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements.

We launched a further wave of UK-wide advertising in mid-May to help ensure they were aware of the EUSS and its benefits and of how to apply and access support in doing so if they needed it, although existing ILR holders need not apply. This built on the successful campaign already delivered – with £7.9 million having now been invested in such activity – with targeted adverts appearing on social media, website banners, catch up TV and radio up to the application deadline of 30 June.

The Home Office has also made available £22 million in grant funding for a network of now 72 organisations across the UK, which includes charities, local authorities and community groups, to engage with vulnerable groups and help them apply to the EUSS.

We are also continuing to engage with local authorities, the Devolved Administrations, employers, community groups and others to raise awareness of the EUSS and encourage those eligible who are yet to apply to do so.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
15th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1628 and HL1629), how someone would check whether they had (1) "UK immigration status", and (2) indefinite leave to enter or remain in the UK.

A person who is issued with a UK Immigration status or Indefinite leave to Enter or Remain are provided with a visa in their passport, a biometric residence permit or an electronic visa confirming their status. Our decision notices also provide customers with details on their terms of leave.

A person who has applied to the EU Settlement Scheme or via the fully digital processes for the British Nationals (Overseas) and Points Based System routes, will have created a UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) account. They can use their UKVI account credentials to log into the online View and Prove service.

If an individual has been notified they have a digital certificate of application, they are able to use the View and Prove service to prove their rights:

https://www.gov.uk/view-prove-immigration-status

The Home Office also publishes information to assist EU national customers understand their immigration status. Further information can be found on our website: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/view-and-prove-your-immigration-status-evisa/your-immigration-status-an-introduction-for-eu-eea-and-swiss-citizens-accessible-version

For longer-term settled residents who wish to replace their visa for a biometric residence permit, they can submit an application for a biometric residence permit. Further information can be found on the gov.uk website: https://www.gov.uk/biometric-residence-permits/replace-visa-brp

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
15th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1628 and HL1629), what are the additional rights available to EU, EEA and EFTA nationals under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements that they will not possess if they do not apply to the EU Settlement Scheme.

An EU, European Economic Area (EEA) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) national who was settled in the UK before 1 January 1973 may have acquired indefinite leave to enter or remain automatically under section 1(2) of the Immigration Act 1971.

Where they hold indefinite leave to enter or remain obtained in this way, or where an EU, EEA or EFTA national holds such leave obtained by applying for it under another immigration route, they do not need to apply for status under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS), but they may do so if they wish given the benefits of doing so.

Indefinite leave to enter or remain granted under the EUSS (referred to as ‘settled status’) enables the holder to access additional rights in line with the Citizens’ Rights Agreements. For example, they can be absent from the UK for five consecutive years, rather than two years, before their settled status lapses, and they can sponsor certain family members to join them in the UK without meeting the requirements of the family Immigration Rules.

Where an EEA national was resident in the UK by 31 December 2020 based on free movement rights, they must apply to the EU Settlement Scheme for status under UK immigration law. The deadline for doing so was 30 June 2021, but late applications will be accepted where reasonable grounds exist for missing the deadline. This includes where someone has lived in the UK for many years and did not realise they needed to apply.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
15th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 14 July (HL1629), whether someone (1) born in an (a) European Economic Area, or (b) European Free Trade Area, state other than the UK, (2) who carries a non-UK passport, (3) who is married to a UK citizen, and (4) has (a) resided, and (b) been employed, in the UK for over 20 years including paying taxes or drawing pension payments, would automatically have "UK immigration status" by dint of those characteristics; or whether they might still need to apply for it under the EU Settlement Scheme.

An EU, European Economic Area (EEA) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) national who was settled in the UK before 1 January 1973 may have acquired indefinite leave to enter or remain automatically under section 1(2) of the Immigration Act 1971.

Where they hold indefinite leave to enter or remain obtained in this way, or where an EU, EEA or EFTA national holds such leave obtained by applying for it under another immigration route, they do not need to apply for status under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS), but they may do so if they wish given the benefits of doing so.

Indefinite leave to enter or remain granted under the EUSS (referred to as ‘settled status’) enables the holder to access additional rights in line with the Citizens’ Rights Agreements. For example, they can be absent from the UK for five consecutive years, rather than two years, before their settled status lapses, and they can sponsor certain family members to join them in the UK without meeting the requirements of the family Immigration Rules.

Where an EEA national was resident in the UK by 31 December 2020 based on free movement rights, they must apply to the EU Settlement Scheme for status under UK immigration law. The deadline for doing so was 30 June 2021, but late applications will be accepted where reasonable grounds exist for missing the deadline. This includes where someone has lived in the UK for many years and did not realise they needed to apply.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
1st Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether a person (1) born in an (a) European Economic Area, or (b) European Free Trade Area, state other than the UK, (2) who carries a non-UK passport, (3) who is married to a UK citizen, and (4) has (a) resided, and (b) been employed, in the UK for over 20 years including paying taxes or drawing pension payments, is required to apply for revised domiciliary or another form of changed residency status.

EU, European Economic Area (EEA) and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) nationals now require UK immigration status to live in the UK. Where they do not already hold such status, they may obtain it under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS), where they were resident in the UK by 31 December 2020 or are a family member joining such a person, or under the points-based immigration system.

EU, EEA and EFTA nationals who acquired a right of permanent residence here under EU law still need to apply for status under the EUSS.

Those who already have indefinite leave to enter or remain in the UK do not need to apply for EUSS status, but may do so, free of charge, if they wish, to take advantage of the additional rights available to them under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
1st Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether a person (1) born in the EU, (2) with an EU Member State passport, (3) who is married to a UK citizen, and (4) has (a) resided, and (b) been employed, in the UK for over 20 years, including paying taxes or drawing pension payments, is required to apply for revised domiciliary or another form of changed residency status.

EU, European Economic Area (EEA) and European Free Trade Association (EFTA) nationals now require UK immigration status to live in the UK. Where they do not already hold such status, they may obtain it under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS), where they were resident in the UK by 31 December 2020 or are a family member joining such a person, or under the points-based immigration system.

EU, EEA and EFTA nationals who acquired a right of permanent residence here under EU law still need to apply for status under the EUSS.

Those who already have indefinite leave to enter or remain in the UK do not need to apply for EUSS status, but may do so, free of charge, if they wish, to take advantage of the additional rights available to them under the Citizens’ Rights Agreements.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
23rd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they intend to take following the correspondence on the use of non-compliant equipment during Channel crossings sent to the Home Office by Charles Sharrod.

The Home Office previously engaged with the French on this issue of the applicability of French maritime regulation to migrant vessels and will continue to do so. However, any decision on when, where and how to apply French law in this area must be a matter for the French, in their jurisdiction.

Our New Plan for Immigration and the legislation to implement it will bring root and branch reform to the asylum system. We will take tougher action against anyone who facilitates illegal entry, such as by piloting a small boat. We plan to increase the maximum sentence for people smuggling to life imprisonment.

Border Force will be granted additional powers to stop illegal migration, including the ability to stop and redirect vessels at sea. These reforms will break the business model of criminal trafficking networks. They will deter illegal entry into this country and make it unviable.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
22nd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they are making to the French authorities on the need to take measures to ensure the safety and licences of boats to carry persons across the English Channel.

The Home Office did reply to Mr Sharrod’s letters of 13 August 2020 and 20 October 2020, which was raised with the Home Office by a member in another place.

The Home Office previously engaged with the French on this issue of the applicability of French maritime regulation to migrant vessels and will continue to do so. However, any decision on when, where and how to apply French law in this area must be a matter for the French, in their jurisdiction. The Home Office is aware of France's obligations under the Migrant Smuggling Protocol to prevent illegal migration.

Our New Plan for Immigration and the legislation to implement it will bring root and branch reform to the asylum system. We will take tougher action against anyone who facilitates illegal entry, such as by piloting a small boat. We plan to increase the maximum sentence for people smuggling to life imprisonment.

Border Force will be granted additional powers to stop illegal migration, including the ability to stop and redirect vessels at sea. These reforms will break the business model of criminal trafficking networks. They will deter illegal entry into this country and make it unviable.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
22nd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have made, or intend to make, representations to the government of France on the enforcement of regulations applicable to France on the use of small boats departing the coast of France and entering British waters.

The Home Office did reply to Mr Sharrod’s letters of 13 August 2020 and 20 October 2020, which was raised with the Home Office by a member in another place.

The Home Office previously engaged with the French on this issue of the applicability of French maritime regulation to migrant vessels and will continue to do so. However, any decision on when, where and how to apply French law in this area must be a matter for the French, in their jurisdiction. The Home Office is aware of France's obligations under the Migrant Smuggling Protocol to prevent illegal migration.

Our New Plan for Immigration and the legislation to implement it will bring root and branch reform to the asylum system. We will take tougher action against anyone who facilitates illegal entry, such as by piloting a small boat. We plan to increase the maximum sentence for people smuggling to life imprisonment.

Border Force will be granted additional powers to stop illegal migration, including the ability to stop and redirect vessels at sea. These reforms will break the business model of criminal trafficking networks. They will deter illegal entry into this country and make it unviable.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
22nd Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they expect the Home Office will respond to former coxswain of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution Charles Sharrod’s letter regarding the equipment used by migrants during Channel crossings.

The Home Office did reply to Mr Sharrod’s letters of 13 August 2020 and 20 October 2020, which was raised with the Home Office by a member in another place.

The Home Office previously engaged with the French on this issue of the applicability of French maritime regulation to migrant vessels and will continue to do so. However, any decision on when, where and how to apply French law in this area must be a matter for the French, in their jurisdiction. The Home Office is aware of France's obligations under the Migrant Smuggling Protocol to prevent illegal migration.

Our New Plan for Immigration and the legislation to implement it will bring root and branch reform to the asylum system. We will take tougher action against anyone who facilitates illegal entry, such as by piloting a small boat. We plan to increase the maximum sentence for people smuggling to life imprisonment.

Border Force will be granted additional powers to stop illegal migration, including the ability to stop and redirect vessels at sea. These reforms will break the business model of criminal trafficking networks. They will deter illegal entry into this country and make it unviable.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
22nd Jan 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have commissioned any report considering the characteristics of people who commit group based sexual offences; whether they will publish any such report; and if so, when.

Officials have been pursuing work on several fronts to improve our understanding of the characteristics of group-based child sexual exploitation, as well as the implications for the investigation and prevention of these crimes.

This internal work is being carried out as part of routine policy development. As such, it has not been undertaken with the intention of publication.

Much of the insight gained through our work with law enforcement partners contains operationally and personally sensitive information and will need to remain confidential.

In early 2020 the Government will publish a national strategy, the first of its kind, to tackle all forms of child sexual abuse.

Our new strategy will set out our whole system response to tackling child sexual abuse, including group-based sexual offending, drawing on this internal work. It will set out how we will work across government, law enforcement, safeguarding partners and industry to root out offending, protect victims and help victims and survivors rebuild their lives. We will work tirelessly to tackle all forms of sexual abuse; there will be no no-go areas.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
21st Jan 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to review the Sexual Offences Act 2003, and in particular any provisions relating to the change of name by sexual offenders.

The UK has some of the toughest powers in the world to deal with sex offenders and we are committed to ensuring that the system is as robust as it can be.

Registered sex offenders are managed by the police, who assess the risk each individual poses to the public and monitor changes to offenders’ circumstances.

Offenders must tell the police any names that they have used, including ones used online, and must notify the police within 3 days of any name change. This includes notifying the police of any changes to the offender’s passport or other identity documents. A failure to inform the police of a change in name constitutes a breach of notification requirements which is a criminal offence carrying up to 5 years’ imprisonment.

We will continue to work with the police to ensure they have all the necessary tools to manage sex offenders effectively.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
21st Jan 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the number of custody suites that were available in each borough in London for use by the Metropolitan Police in each year since 2010.

The Home Office does not hold information centrally on the number of custody suites across England and Wales.

Decisions on the use of resources, including custody suites, are a matter for Police and Crime Commissioners and Chief Constables as they best understand the needs of the communities they serve.

Baroness Williams of Trafford
Minister of State (Home Office)
18th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration they give to air pollution levels when making ministerial decisions on whether to call-in a planning application.

Decisions on calling in applications are made in line with published call-in policy as set out in a Written Ministerial Statement by Nick Boles on 26 October 2012. The policy makes it clear that the power to call in a case will only be used very selectively. Air pollution levels are a potential consideration when considering whether to call in an application.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
18th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the Canterbury urban extension on air pollution levels; and what affect the categorisation of Canterbury as an air quality management area has had on their decision on whether to call-in the planning application of the Canterbury urban extension.

In December 2016, the Secretary of State declined to call in this application for his own determination. Following the categorisation of Canterbury as an air quality management area, he received requests to reconsider that decision. These requests were carefully considered having regard to his policy on calling in planning applications. The Secretary of State decided that his original decision, not to call in this application, should stand, and that the application should remain to be determined by the local planning authority.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
18th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of air pollution resulting from the Canterbury urban extension on morbidity rates.

Decisions on calling in applications are made in line with published call-in policy as set out in a Written Ministerial Statement by Nick Boles on 26 October 2012. The policy makes it clear that the power to call in a case will only be used very selectively. Air pollution levels are a potential consideration when considering whether to call in an application.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
23rd Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the rules on the role, responsibilities, and accountability of members of national park planning boards within the UK follow a national model rule book, consistent across national park authorities; and whether applications to vary such rules have to be approved by a Secretary of State.

The Local Government Act 1972 allows local planning authorities (including National Parks) to arrange for the discharge of any of its functions by a committee, sub-committee, or an officer. The operation of such committees, including which applications are considered by members and the procedure by which they are governed, are administrative matters for the National Park Authority.

Like other planning committees, where a decision is made by a National Park planning committee, members should carefully consider all the evidence before them and must be prepared to modify or change their initial view in light of the arguments and evidence presented to them. They must make their final decision at the meeting with an open mind based on this evidence. The law requires that planning decisions are made in accordance with the local development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

National Park authorities must also promote and maintain high standards of conduct by their members. Members have to abide by their authorities’ code of conduct and this must be consistent with the seven ‘Nolan’ principles of standards in public life. National Park Authorities are responsible for ensuring members observe their codes of conduct and maintain high standards.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
23rd Jun 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether members of national park planning boards are bound by collective responsibility under rules approved by a Secretary of State.

The Local Government Act 1972 allows local planning authorities (including National Parks) to arrange for the discharge of any of its functions by a committee, sub-committee, or an officer. The operation of such committees, including which applications are considered by members and the procedure by which they are governed, are administrative matters for the National Park Authority.

Like other planning committees, where a decision is made by a National Park planning committee, members should carefully consider all the evidence before them and must be prepared to modify or change their initial view in light of the arguments and evidence presented to them. They must make their final decision at the meeting with an open mind based on this evidence. The law requires that planning decisions are made in accordance with the local development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

National Park authorities must also promote and maintain high standards of conduct by their members. Members have to abide by their authorities’ code of conduct and this must be consistent with the seven ‘Nolan’ principles of standards in public life. National Park Authorities are responsible for ensuring members observe their codes of conduct and maintain high standards.

Lord Greenhalgh
Minister of State (Home Office)
19th May 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what protocols exist governing the circumstances under which a person under the age of 16 can be subject to handcuff restraint.

There are two settings in which a child aged 16 or under may be handcuffed: through interaction with the Police, or within a secure setting overseen by the Youth Custody Service.

Owing to the way in which police use of force data is collected, data is recorded on the number of times a tactic was used, not the number of unique events or people involved in incidents. 36,279 police handcuffing tactics were recorded for those aged under 18 in the year ending March 2020.

In 2019/20, in Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres handcuffs were applied to children under the age of 16 on 117 occasions, involving 63 different individual children.

Any use of force, including the use of handcuffs by the Police or within a secure setting, must be reasonable and necessary in the circumstances, proportionate to the threat posed and only the minimum force necessary may be used.

The College of Policing is responsible for setting the standards and training to which police operate. Guidance on the use of force and restraint by the police is set out in the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice, which includes guidance on how to deal with vulnerable people.

In Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres, handcuffs are one of a range of approved restraint techniques. Handcuffs are used as an ethical and safer alternative to physical restraint technique. The use of handcuffs must always be reasonable and proportionate, and with the aim of preventing harm occurring to the young person or others. A report must be made every time handcuffs are used.

Lord Wolfson of Tredegar
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
19th May 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the number of children under the age of 16 who have been subject to handcuff restraint in the last 12 month period for which statistics are available.

There are two settings in which a child aged 16 or under may be handcuffed: through interaction with the Police, or within a secure setting overseen by the Youth Custody Service.

Owing to the way in which police use of force data is collected, data is recorded on the number of times a tactic was used, not the number of unique events or people involved in incidents. 36,279 police handcuffing tactics were recorded for those aged under 18 in the year ending March 2020.

In 2019/20, in Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres handcuffs were applied to children under the age of 16 on 117 occasions, involving 63 different individual children.

Any use of force, including the use of handcuffs by the Police or within a secure setting, must be reasonable and necessary in the circumstances, proportionate to the threat posed and only the minimum force necessary may be used.

The College of Policing is responsible for setting the standards and training to which police operate. Guidance on the use of force and restraint by the police is set out in the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice, which includes guidance on how to deal with vulnerable people.

In Young Offender Institutions and Secure Training Centres, handcuffs are one of a range of approved restraint techniques. Handcuffs are used as an ethical and safer alternative to physical restraint technique. The use of handcuffs must always be reasonable and proportionate, and with the aim of preventing harm occurring to the young person or others. A report must be made every time handcuffs are used.

Lord Wolfson of Tredegar
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)