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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if her Department will issue guidance to (a) the Environment Agency and (b) local authority officers setting out their respective powers to (i) identify an odour and (ii) take enforcement action against an alleged producer of an odour.

Answered by Emma Hardy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Owners of industrial, trade and business premises are expected to use the best practicable means available to reduce odours, effluvia and other potential sources of statutory nuisance emanating from their place of work in the first place. If this is not happening, then Local Authorities have powers through the Environmental Protection Act 1990 to investigate and issue abatement notices to stop the problem from re-occurring if they determine a statutory nuisance exists.

For certain categories of industrial installations regulated under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 (EPR), the Environment Agency (EA) and Local Authorities regulate odour pollution through conditions in environmental permits. Operators of these sites have to use appropriate measures or best available techniques (BAT or UKBAT where it exists) to develop management controls to prevent, or, where that is not possible, to reduce odour pollution.

The EA uses permitting and enforcement tools to tackle odour pollution from the sites it regulates. These are used on a sliding scale ranging from advice and guidance to criminal prosecutions for serious pollution incidents, principally through powers from the EPRs.

Statutory guidance, which is updated from time to time, is already available for the EA and local authorities on how the EPRs should be implemented.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what impact her Department estimates GDPR regulations have had on productivity since they were adopted.

Answered by Ian Murray - Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

There is currently no definitive empirical study specifying UK-wide GDPR impact on productivity since adoption in 2018.

However, UK GDPR strengthened individuals’ rights and trust in digital services, supporting long-term economic growth. The Data (Use and Access) Act is designed to maintain high standards of data protection while reducing unnecessary compliance burdens. Reforms expect to support UK productivity growth by lowering administrative costs for routine data processing, improving regulatory certainty, and enabling responsible data driven innovation. DSIT estimates net impacts of £1.2 billion over ten years from data protection and privacy reforms, including around £300 million in productivity-related gains.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether judges have been consulted about possible increased personal risks of replacing some jury trials with named judge trials as proposed in the Courts and Tribunals Bill.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The safety and security, welfare, and independence of the judiciary remain paramount. Engagement with the judiciary on the court reform measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill included consideration of personal safety and security. We will continue to work with the judiciary as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses and these measures are implemented.

When implemented, judge‑only trials will operate within the existing robust HMCTS security framework. This already includes a range of judicial security policies and procedures, such as the Judicial Harassment Protocol, designed to protect judicial office holders in court, outside of court, and online as a result of their judicial role.

Last year, the Department invested over £20 million extra funding in judicial security, and HMCTS is continuing to improve its security procedures. We stand ready to do more if required.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the level of risk to named judges who replace juries in trials.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The safety and security, welfare, and independence of the judiciary remain paramount. Engagement with the judiciary on the court reform measures in the Courts and Tribunals Bill included consideration of personal safety and security. We will continue to work with the judiciary as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses and these measures are implemented.

When implemented, judge‑only trials will operate within the existing robust HMCTS security framework. This already includes a range of judicial security policies and procedures, such as the Judicial Harassment Protocol, designed to protect judicial office holders in court, outside of court, and online as a result of their judicial role.

Last year, the Department invested over £20 million extra funding in judicial security, and HMCTS is continuing to improve its security procedures. We stand ready to do more if required.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether the third Road Investment strategy (RIS3) can include specific funding to enable National Highways to pay its employees the £1,500 Pay Remit Guidance payment (which has been withheld by National Highways since 2022/23).

Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)

National Highways is responsible for setting pay awards that are both affordable and aligned within its overall RIS3 budget. During 2022, the organisation awarded a larger pay deal compared to the core Civil Service and as such took the decision to not offer the £1500 non-consolidated payment.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether any Department covered by the Pay Remit Guidance had its 2022/23 budget increased or altered to enable the £1,500 Pay Remit Guidance payment to be made.

Answered by Satvir Kaur - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)

Decisions on pay below Senior Civil Service are delegated to Departments. Cabinet Office does not have sight of Departments’ budgetary decisions.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the (a) availability and (b) consistency of guidance offered to parents of children with communication difficulties.

Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)

As part of our new investment, schools will be able to access support, advice, training and specialist expertise from professionals such as speech and language therapists, educational psychologists, occupational therapists and specialist teachers. These experts will work directly with school staff to equip them with the skills and strategies to better meet need, including delivering group‑level interventions to address needs early and effectively.

We will also set out guidance on inclusive, evidence-based ordinarily available provision through the National Inclusion Standards, to support all mainstream settings to meet the needs of all children and young people effectively. Schools will be required to produce an Inclusion Strategy, encouraging effective cohort-level planning for common and predictable needs and the meaningful implementation of inclusive education.

We also continue to involve and engage with families and special educational needs and disabilities stakeholders through our Participation and Family Support programme.

Redundancies of skilled rail workers at Balfour Beatty

Deployment of nuclear power

Found: We agree with MP Charlotte Nichols who in her extraordinary and brave speech in the Commons on 10 March