Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to ensure NHS workforce data systems enable NHS organisations to record and monitor the number of blind and partially sighted staff.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS England is leading work on the Unified Information Standard for Protected Characteristics. This is a wide-ranging review of how the National Health Service records data in relation to protected characteristics across its workforce, in patient datasets and in associated surveys. As part of this programme, NHS England is exploring detailed disability recording to identify blind or partially sighted people.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she plans to take steps to improve the collection of data on blind and partially sighted NHS employees to support workforce equality and inclusion.
Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS England is leading work on the Unified Information Standard for Protected Characteristics. This is a wide-ranging review of how the National Health Service records data in relation to protected characteristics across its workforce, in patient datasets and in associated surveys. As part of this programme, NHS England is exploring detailed disability recording to identify blind or partially sighted people.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what progress her Department has made on delivering the commitment in the 10-year health plan to launch a moonshot to end the obesity epidemic.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the Hon. Member to the answer provided in the House of Lords on 15 September in response to Question HL2959.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, why there is a delay between the annual uplift to Direct Payments rates taking effect on 1 April and the uprated rates being reflected in payments to recipients; what the average length of that delay has been in each of the last five years; and what steps he is taking to ensure that recipients receive the full benefit of annual uplifts promptly.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
A direct payment is one way in which a person may receive their personal budget. Under the Care Act 2014, a personal budget must be sufficient to meet a person's eligible care and support needs. There is no annual uprating process for personal budgets or in effect, direct payments. It is for local authorities to review and revise personal budgets where changes in costs or circumstances affect their sufficiency. The Department does not collect data on the time taken by local authorities to make such revisions and therefore does not hold information on the average length of any delay. This responsibility rests with individual local authorities.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether she plans to review the effectiveness of penalties for drivers who fail to stop when directed to do so by police; and whether her Department has assessed the potential road-safety benefits of legislative reforms adopted in Queensland and Western Australia to deter motorists from evading police pursuits.
Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
Drivers are required by law to stop when directed to do so by a police officer in uniform. Failing to do so is an offence.
Drivers who drive dangerously while evading police can also be prosecuted for dangerous driving, which carries a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine and obligatory disqualification from driving. The sentencing guidelines treat evading police as a ‘high-culpability’ factor. This means the driver’s actions attract a greater degree of blame, which is taken into account when the court decides the sentence. We are not currently considering introducing a separate offence combining failure to stop for police and dangerous driving, but we keep the motoring offences framework under review.
The police and Crown Prosecution Service decide whether to bring charges, and the courts decide the sentence in each case.
The Department has not assessed the road-safety benefits of the legislative reforms adopted in Western Australia and Queensland. However, alongside the Road Safety Strategy, the Government consulted on changes to motoring offences, including introducing penalty points for failing to stop for police and requiring drivers to switch off their engines when stopped. The consultation closed on 11 May 2026 and responses are being analysed.
The decision to commence, continue or terminate a police pursuit is an operational matter for the officers involved.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether she has considered introducing a specific criminal offence for motorists who fail to stop for police and engage in dangerous driving while attempting to evade pursuit; and if she will review international approaches to strengthening penalties for such offences.
Answered by Justin Madders - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
Drivers are required by law to stop when directed to do so by a police officer in uniform. Failing to do so is an offence.
Drivers who drive dangerously while evading police can also be prosecuted for dangerous driving, which carries a maximum sentence of two years’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine and obligatory disqualification from driving. The sentencing guidelines treat evading police as a ‘high-culpability’ factor. This means the driver’s actions attract a greater degree of blame, which is taken into account when the court decides the sentence. We are not currently considering introducing a separate offence combining failure to stop for police and dangerous driving, but we keep the motoring offences framework under review.
The police and Crown Prosecution Service decide whether to bring charges, and the courts decide the sentence in each case.
The Department has not assessed the road-safety benefits of the legislative reforms adopted in Western Australia and Queensland. However, alongside the Road Safety Strategy, the Government consulted on changes to motoring offences, including introducing penalty points for failing to stop for police and requiring drivers to switch off their engines when stopped. The consultation closed on 11 May 2026 and responses are being analysed.
The decision to commence, continue or terminate a police pursuit is an operational matter for the officers involved.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she has considered the potential merits of upgrading nitrous oxide to a higher drug class; and whether she has made an assessment of the potential merits of introducing tougher penalties for the supply and use of nitrous oxide, particularly in cases where individuals drive under its influence.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
Nitrous oxide was controlled in November 2023 as a Class C drug under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (“the 1971 Act”). Illicit supply can lead to up to 14 years’ imprisonment and possession up to two years’ imprisonment. The Government will continue to keep the measures related to nitrous oxide under the 1971 Act under review, but there are currently no plans to change its classification.
Data from the Crime Survey for England and Wales suggests that the use of nitrous oxide decreased among those aged 16 to 59 from 0.9% in the year ending March 2024 to 0.5% in the year ending March 2025. This is equivalent to a reduction from an estimated 311,000 users to 151,000.
Under section 4 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a person commits an offence if their ability to drive is impaired by drugs, including nitrous oxide. A person convicted of driving or attempting to drive while impaired can face up to six months' imprisonment, an unlimited fine, and a driving disqualification of at least 12 months.
There are no specific proposals to increase these penalties. The Department for Transport has consulted on possible changes to the motoring offences framework, including drink and drug driving penalties and enforcement. The consultation has now closed and responses are being considered.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness and independence of the Independent Press Standards Organisation, in light of its record on upholding complaints, conducting standards investigations and issuing sanctions against member publishers.
Answered by Ian Murray - Minister of State (Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport)
The UK has a self-regulatory system for the press, which is independent from Government. An independent press is important for press freedom and to ensure the public has access to accurate and trustworthy information from a range of different sources.
We expect all publishers to operate within the bounds of the law and adhere to high ethical and professional standards, as well as ensure appropriate routes to redress if these standards are not met. However, the Government does not intervene in or evaluate the work of regulators, including the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Since the findings of the Leveson Report in 2012 there has been a substantial shift in the regulatory landscape, including the establishment of two regulators, IPSO and Impress, as well as the Press Recognition Panel, to ensure these high standards are met.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, whether her Department will consider the potential merits of establishing a new independent system of press regulation, audited against the Leveson criteria.
Answered by Ian Murray - Minister of State (Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport)
The UK has a self-regulatory system for the press, which is independent from Government. An independent press is important for press freedom and to ensure the public has access to accurate and trustworthy information from a range of different sources.
We expect all publishers to operate within the bounds of the law and adhere to high ethical and professional standards, as well as ensure appropriate routes to redress if these standards are not met. However, the Government does not intervene in or evaluate the work of regulators, including the Independent Press Standards Organisation. Since the findings of the Leveson Report in 2012 there has been a substantial shift in the regulatory landscape, including the establishment of two regulators, IPSO and Impress, as well as the Press Recognition Panel, to ensure these high standards are met.
Asked by: Cat Eccles (Labour - Stourbridge)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps she is taking through penalties to help tackle the sale of illegal tobacco and vapes.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Tobacco and vape products sold in the United Kingdom must meet product, packaging, and notification requirements. The maximum penalty that could be imposed for failing to comply with requirements is two years imprisonment or an unlimited fine, or both.
On 1 June 2025, it became illegal to sell or supply single use vapes in the United Kingdom. In England, those selling single use vapes face £200 fixed monetary penalties and stop notices ordering them to cease the illegal activity. If a notice is not complied with, an individual is guilty of an offence and is liable for an unlimited fine or imprisonment.
HM Revenue and Customs operate a UK Track and Trace System to combat illicit tobacco sales. Penalties for failing to meet the requirements of the Tobacco Track and Trace System include fines of up to £10,000 and seizure of illicit tobacco products. For persistent non-compliance, HM Revenue and Customs can deactivate a business’ economic operator ID which would mean the business can no longer buy or sell tobacco legally in the UK.
A new Vaping Products Duty will be introduced from 1 October 2026, alongside a Vaping Duty Stamps scheme. HM Revenue and Customs will adopt similar compliance and enforcement powers to those that are already in place to administer other taxes and duties, including penalties for those who do not meet their obligations.