Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office on 16 June (HC6053), whether the prevailing policy allows for pets resident at 10 Downing Street to be transported at public expense in vehicles in which the Prime Minister is not present.

Answered by Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent - Captain of the King's Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard (HM Household) (Deputy Chief Whip, House of Lords)

Pets are not transported to Chequers independently of the Prime Minister’s family. There is therefore no additional cost to the taxpayer.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Department for Transport on 29 June (HC12808), when they estimate they will deliver a full North-South new line between Birmingham and Manchester.

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

The Northern Growth Strategy set out the Government’s long-term intention to build a new line between Birmingham and Manchester, following the delivery of HS2 Phase One and Northern Powerhouse Rail. In the meantime, we are learning lessons from HS2 and undertaking feasibility work with local partners before decisions on specification and delivery timescales are made.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 2 June (HL335), how many rail trespass incidents were recorded in each of the last 30 years; and what estimate they have made of the long-term revenue loss arising from those incidents in each of those years.

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

Data supplied by Network Rail indicates that the volume of trespass incidents increased from 6,415 in 2014/15 to 13,921 in 2025/26 (an increase of 117 per cent).

Over the same time, when adjusted for inflation, the estimated cost of delays associated with trespass incidents rose from £46.7 million to £85.5 million (an increase of 83 per cent).

When adjusted for inflation, the average estimated cost per trespass incident has reduced over time, from approximately £7,300 in 2014/15 to around £6,100 in 2025/26.

Volume of trespass related incidents and estimated costs of associated delays, annual, Great Britain, 2014/15 to 2025/26

Notes:

1. Incidents are delay causing incidents attributed to XA,VA reason codes

2. An incident can appear in more than one rail period if delay was suffered in more than one period

3. Costs are an internal Network Rail estimate of the long-term revenue loss due to those incidents (based on the economics behind the Schedule 8 performance regime)

Source: Network Rail

4. Delay & Cancellation metric dashboard

5. Process for Performance Improvement (PfPI) Costs are from the Performance System database Business Objects attribution universe

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 19 June (HL718), what was the total value of Schedule 8 compensation payments made by Network Rail to Train Operating Companies resulting from rail trespass incidents in each of the last 30 years.

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

Network Rail holds data on the estimated Schedule 8 costs arising from rail trespass incidents from 1 April 2014 onwards. The total value of the payments during this time can be found in the following table:

Volume of trespass related incidents and estimated costs of associated delays, annual, Great Britain, 2014/15 to 2025/26

Notes:

1. Incidents are delay causing incidents attributed to XA,VA reason codes

2. An incident can appear in more than one rail period if delay was suffered in more than one period

3. Costs are an internal Network Rail estimate of the long-term revenue loss due to those incidents (based on the economics behind the Schedule 8 performance regime)

Source: Network Rail

4. Delay & Cancellation metric dashboard

5. Process for Performance Improvement (PfPI) Costs are from the Performance System database Business Objects attribution universe

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill on 28 May (HL40), whether they have now made an estimate of the capital and ongoing operating costs of developing, launching and maintaining the proposed Great British Railways ticketing website and mobile application.

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

Potential estimates will not be published in advance of the launch and completion of the procurement process, as these are commercially sensitive.

We have recently communicated to the supplier market our target of launching the procurement process in late Summer/early Autumn.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office on 10 July (HC13240), what are the current overseas posts and locations classified as qualifying hardship posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas.

Answered by Lord Wood of Anfield - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

Given the large number of posts and locations in the scope of the Noble Lord's question, I will arrange for a list to be placed in the library, containing details of: (a) the 150 locations classified as qualifying hardship posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas, at the time that the previous government left office in July 2024; and (b) the six locations that have subsequently been removed from that list.

The Noble Lord will see from the aforementioned list that these arrangements are not new, and indeed have applied consistently under successive governments for a number of decades.

Below, in reference to HL2091 (tabled on 14 July 2026), is a list of the 150 locations worldwide, which – at the end of the previous government’s term in office in July 2024 – were classified as qualifying ‘hardship’ posts for the purpose of additional journeys for staff posted overseas. In the subsequent two years, up to July 2026, six locations have been removed from the qualifying list: Bamako, Buenos Aires, Panama City, Pyongyang, Santiago and Sarajevo.

Abidjan

Abu Dhabi

Abuja

Accra

Adamstown

Addis Ababa

Ahmedabad

Algiers

Al-Khobar

Almaty

Amman

Ankara

Antananarivo

Apia

Ascension Island

Ashgabat

Asmara

Astana

Asuncion

Baku

Bali

Bamako

Bandar Seri Begawan

Bangkok

Banjul

Beijing

Beirut

Belmopan

Bengaluru

Bishkek

Bogota

Brades

Brasilia

Buenos Aires

Bujumbura

Cairo

Cape Town

Caracas

Casablanca

Castries

Chandigarh

Chennai

Chisinau

Chongqing

Colombo

Conakry

Dakar

Dar Es Salaam

Dhaka

Djibouti

Doha

Dubai

Dushanbe

Freetown

Gaborone

Georgetown

Grand Turk

Guangzhou

Guatemala City

Hanoi

Harare

Havana

Ho Chi Minh City

Honiara

Hyderabad

Islamabad

Istanbul

Jakarta

Jakarta (ASEAN)

Jamestown

Jeddah

Jerusalem

Johannesburg

Kampala

Karachi

Kathmandu

Khartoum

Kigali

Kingston

Kingstown

Kinshasa

Kolkata

Kuala Lumpur

Kuwait

La Paz

Lagos

Lahore

Lilongwe

Lima

Luanda

Lusaka

Male

Manama

Manila

Maputo

Maseru

Mbabane

Mexico City

Minsk

Monrovia

Monterrey

Moscow

Mumbai

Muscat

Nairobi

N'Djamena

Nassau

New Delhi

Niamey

Nouakchott

Nuku'alofa

Panama City

Phnom Penh

Port au Prince

Port Moresby

Port of Spain

Port Vila

Pretoria

Pristina

Pyongyang

Quito

Rabat

Rio de Janeiro

Riyadh

San Jose

San Salvador

Santiago

Santo Domingo

Sao Paulo

Sarajevo

Shanghai

St George's

St John's

Stanley

Suva

Tashkent

Tehran

Tel Aviv

Tirana

Tristan da Cunha

Tunis

Ulaanbaatar

Victoria

Vientiane

Windhoek

Wuhan

Yangon

Yaounde

Yekaterinburg

Yerevan

In the vast majority of cases, the locations listed above have been classified as qualifying ‘hardship’ posts since that system of classification – and accompanying staff allowances – were introduced more than three decades ago. Assessments of ‘hardship’ take into account a number of factors that apply irrespective of the financial wealth and standard of living in each post, but which may mean that members of staff are required to take additional respite breaks for the benefit of their physical or mental health, in locations where – for example – there are high levels of air pollution (e.g. New Delhi or Beijing), high levels of crime (e.g. Port of Spain or Pretoria), or regular and ongoing security threats (e.g. Tel Aviv or Riyadh).