Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, at what time between 16 and 19 weeks trusts are assessed for providing the national standard of a scan to be provided between 16 to 19 weeks.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Pregnant women are offered at least two ultrasound scans during pregnancy, at 11 to 14 weeks and between 18 and 21 weeks. National Health Service trusts are measured against the NHS Fetal Anomaly Screening Programme standard for the 20-week screening scan. This standard requires providers to offer the scan between 18 weeks and zero days, and 20 weeks and six days of pregnancy. The screening pathway should be completed by 23 weeks and zero days of pregnancy.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, (a) to what extent and (b) via what methods midwives are assessed for asking whether treatment for abnormal cervical cells has taken place at the first appointment.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Assessment of midwifery practice is undertaken locally by National Health Service providers through clinical governance, supervision, record-keeping standards, training, and professional regulation requirements.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what percentage of Sudanese nationals who claim asylum following a grant of entry clearance as a student go on to claim asylum support.
Answered by Anna Turley - Minister of State (Home Office)
A high proportion of Sudanese nationals following a grant of entry clearance as a student go on to claim asylum. In Year-Ending September 2025, asylum claims linked to a student visa as a proportion of all student visa applications were 46% for Sudanese nationals.
Currently, asylum seekers in the UK receive a package of support which has become a financial burden on the taxpayer, with annual costs of £4 billion across accommodation and support last year.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether criminal convictions given to Hong Kongers in Hong Kong courts under the National Security Act can result in denied Electronic Travel Authorisation to the UK.
Answered by Jo White - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
An application for an ETA must be refused where the applicant has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or overseas for which they have received a custodial or suspended sentence of 12 months or more, or has been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK or overseas unless more than 12 months have passed since the date of conviction.
Applicants whose ETA is refused are still free to apply for a visit visa, which will allow for a more thorough consideration of their circumstances by a decision-maker. Refusal of an ETA will not necessarily result in a subsequent visa application being refused; this will depend on individual circumstances and vary on a case-by-case basis.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what methods the Department is using to ensure young people with special education needs and disabilities (SEND) are being consulted on the future of SEND policy.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
The department recognises the importance of hearing directly from children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) as part of developing SEND reforms.
Following engagement activity earlier this year that informed the department's reform programme, officials worked with the Council for Disabled Children (CDC) to hold 27 conversations with children and young people’s groups across England. These events helped inform the reforms, and provided opportunities for children and young people to share their views on what matters most to them and how they would like to be involved in shaping future policy.
The department has been carefully considering the feedback from children and young people. We will publish a response to the SEND consultation in due course and bring forward legislation at the earliest opportunity. Legislation will provide the foundation for our reforms, and we will continue to engage closely with young people, parents and professionals on how they will work in practice.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, on what grounds complaints to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator are dismissed; and what equality impact assessments on age, race and disability have been made.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
In 2025, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) resolved 3,950 student complaints. Of these, 2% were found to be ‘justified’ and 5% were found to be ‘partly justified’. A further 13% were settled in favour of the student before a formal decision was reached. Following OIA recommendations, higher education providers offered £875,933 in compensation and £962,979 through settlement agreements reached before a final OIA decision. The OIA does not publish an average compensation figure because not all complaints require financial remedy. Many are resolved through reconsideration of decisions, repeat assessment opportunities, apologies or procedural improvements.
In 2025, 43% of complaints were found to be ‘not justified’ because the provider had followed procedures and reached a reasonable decision, 7% were ‘not justified (reasonable offer made)’ where the provider had already offered a fair remedy, and 20% were ‘not eligible’ because they fell outside the OIA’s remit. The OIA reports that ‘not justified’ outcomes are particularly common in academic appeals and disciplinary cases where providers generally have well-established processes and standards in place.
The OIA is responsible for meeting its own equality duties. It publishes information on the characteristics of students who bring complaints and use this data to monitor accessibility and outcomes. In 2025, 42% of students who complained disclosed a disability. The OIA reports that complaints involving reasonable adjustments to accommodate a disability were more likely than average to be upheld or settled.
The 2025 OIA Annual Report can be found here: https://www.oiahe.org.uk/media/xfljp10u/oia-annual-report-2025.pdf.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many complaints to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator are (a) upheld and (b) upheld in part; and what the average compensation is.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
In 2025, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) resolved 3,950 student complaints. Of these, 2% were found to be ‘justified’ and 5% were found to be ‘partly justified’. A further 13% were settled in favour of the student before a formal decision was reached. Following OIA recommendations, higher education providers offered £875,933 in compensation and £962,979 through settlement agreements reached before a final OIA decision. The OIA does not publish an average compensation figure because not all complaints require financial remedy. Many are resolved through reconsideration of decisions, repeat assessment opportunities, apologies or procedural improvements.
In 2025, 43% of complaints were found to be ‘not justified’ because the provider had followed procedures and reached a reasonable decision, 7% were ‘not justified (reasonable offer made)’ where the provider had already offered a fair remedy, and 20% were ‘not eligible’ because they fell outside the OIA’s remit. The OIA reports that ‘not justified’ outcomes are particularly common in academic appeals and disciplinary cases where providers generally have well-established processes and standards in place.
The OIA is responsible for meeting its own equality duties. It publishes information on the characteristics of students who bring complaints and use this data to monitor accessibility and outcomes. In 2025, 42% of students who complained disclosed a disability. The OIA reports that complaints involving reasonable adjustments to accommodate a disability were more likely than average to be upheld or settled.
The 2025 OIA Annual Report can be found here: https://www.oiahe.org.uk/media/xfljp10u/oia-annual-report-2025.pdf.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to the sanctions announced on 17 July 2026 which covered a number of entities including some Sudanese-UAE registered companies involved in Rapid Support Forces financing and procurement, whether the Government has shared the information it holds relating to these designations with the Financial Action Task Force.
Answered by Kirsty McNeill - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
Financial Action Task Force (FATF) promotes global standards which aim to tackle money laundering, terrorist and proliferation financing, and assesses whether jurisdictions are taking effective action. As such the UK does not as a matter of course share information relating to our sanctions designations with them. However, as a FATF member, the UK regularly submits relevant evidence to FATF Assessment Teams during their periodic assessment process, as set out in FATF's Universal Procedures.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, to what extent her Department assesses whether NHS health trusts are providing a mechanism for women to report concerns about not being listened to.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Renewed Women’s Health Strategy for England, published in April 2026, places tackling medical misogyny at its core, recognising that women have been dismissed for far too long and that this must change.
The strategy takes a systemic approach to addressing medical misogyny and ensuring women’s voices and experiences shape care. This includes putting women’s lived experience, including pain and whether they felt listened to, at the heart of how National Health Service quality is defined, measured, and improved. For the first time, women’s feedback on pain management will directly influence NHS accountability, and patient reported experience measures will be embedded in core women’s health pathways.
The Renewed Women’s Health Strategy strengthens escalation and feedback routes, building on Jess’s Rule and Martha’s Rule, so women can challenge when symptoms persist or they feel they are not being listened to. Jess’s Rule ensures that patients who have been seen by a general practitioner three times without a clear diagnosis will have their care rethought. Similarly, Martha’s Rule allows hospital inpatients and their families to seek an urgent review of their condition if it is rapidly deteriorating.
The Renewed Women’s Health Strategy also introduces a new measure of how often women have to repeat their story to different professionals, supporting better continuity through the diagnostic journey.
Asked by: Anneliese Dodds (Labour (Co-op) - Oxford East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what percentage of responses are made from the DWP to HMCTS within the 28-day window following an appeal against a benefit decision.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government) (Equalities)
The information requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost.