First elected: 1st May 1997
Left House: 30th May 2024 (Dissolution)
Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
These initiatives were driven by Crispin Blunt, 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.
Crispin Blunt has not introduced any legislation before Parliament
Youth Courts and Sentencing Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Rob Butler (Con)
Problem Drug Use Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Tommy Sheppard (SNP)
Doctors and Nurses (Developing Countries) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Andrew Mitchell (Con)
Marriage (Authorised Belief Organisations) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Rehman Chishti (Con)
Organ Donation (Deemed Consent) Act 2019
Sponsor - Geoffrey Robinson (Lab)
Tobacco Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Kevin Barron (Lab)
Legalisation of Cannabis (Medicinal Purposes) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Karen Lee (Lab)
Abortion Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Diana Johnson (Lab)
Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Bill 2016-17
Sponsor - Diana Johnson (Lab)
There is clear evidence associating conversion practices with a range of significant harms. The Government remains committed to protecting everyone from these abhorrent practices, including those who are targeted on the basis of being transgender. We will shortly publish a draft Bill and consultation response setting out our approach. The draft legislation will go for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee in this parliamentary session.
The Nationality and Borders Bill, which is part of our New Plan for Immigration, seeks to build a fair, but firm asylum and illegal migration system.
On 16 September, we published an Equality Impact Assessment for the policies being taken forward through the Bill. This includes an assessment on potential impacts on people who are LGBTQ+.
I refer the hon. Member to my answer to Question 143679 on 29 January.
The Government continues to conduct research into conversion therapy and will publish this in due course. The Government will introduce steps to end conversion therapy after the research has concluded and we have considered its findings.
The draft Online Safety Bill delivers the government’s manifesto commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online while defending free expression.
Regulation will not prevent adults from accessing or posting legal content, nor require companies to remove specific pieces of legal content. We recognise that adults have the right to upload and access content that some may find offensive or upsetting.
The largest and riskiest services will be required to set out their policies regarding content that is legal but harmful to adults and enforce these consistently. They will no longer be able to arbitrarily remove controversial viewpoints.
Users will have access to effective mechanisms to appeal content that is removed without good reason.
Our approach will empower adult users to keep themselves safe online, while ensuring children are protected and maintaining robust protections for freedom of expression.
The draft Online Safety Bill delivers the government’s manifesto commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online while defending free expression.
Regulation will not prevent adults from accessing or posting legal content, nor require companies to remove specific pieces of legal content. We recognise that adults have the right to upload and access content that some may find offensive or upsetting.
The largest and riskiest services will be required to set out their policies regarding content that is legal but harmful to adults and enforce these consistently. They will no longer be able to arbitrarily remove controversial viewpoints.
Users will have access to effective mechanisms to appeal content that is removed without good reason.
Our approach will empower adult users to keep themselves safe online, while ensuring children are protected and maintaining robust protections for freedom of expression.
The draft Online Safety Bill delivers the government’s manifesto commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online while defending free expression.
Regulation will not prevent adults from accessing or posting legal content, nor require companies to remove specific pieces of legal content. We recognise that adults have the right to upload and access content that some may find offensive or upsetting.
The largest and riskiest services will be required to set out their policies regarding content that is legal but harmful to adults and enforce these consistently. They will no longer be able to arbitrarily remove controversial viewpoints.
Users will have access to effective mechanisms to appeal content that is removed without good reason.
Our approach will empower adult users to keep themselves safe online, while ensuring children are protected and maintaining robust protections for freedom of expression.
The draft Online Safety Bill delivers the government’s manifesto commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online while defending free expression.
Regulation will not prevent adults from accessing or posting legal content, nor require companies to remove specific pieces of legal content. We recognise that adults have the right to upload and access content that some may find offensive or upsetting.
The largest and riskiest services will be required to set out their policies regarding content that is legal but harmful to adults and enforce these consistently. They will no longer be able to arbitrarily remove controversial viewpoints.
Users will have access to effective mechanisms to appeal content that is removed without good reason.
Our approach will empower adult users to keep themselves safe online, while ensuring children are protected and maintaining robust protections for freedom of expression.
The draft Online Safety Bill delivers the government’s manifesto commitment to make the UK the safest place in the world to be online while defending free expression.
Regulation will not prevent adults from accessing or posting legal content, nor require companies to remove specific pieces of legal content. We recognise that adults have the right to upload and access content that some may find offensive or upsetting.
The largest and riskiest services will be required to set out their policies regarding content that is legal but harmful to adults and enforce these consistently. They will no longer be able to arbitrarily remove controversial viewpoints.
Users will have access to effective mechanisms to appeal content that is removed without good reason.
Our approach will empower adult users to keep themselves safe online, while ensuring children are protected and maintaining robust protections for freedom of expression.
I know that the restrictions on singing are frustrating to large numbers of amateur choirs and performance groups across the country and that many people have made sacrifices in order to drive down infections and protect the NHS over the last year. I can assure you that everyone across Government wants to ease these restrictions as soon as possible.
However, it is important that we take a cautious approach in easing restrictions. We have followed the views of public health experts on singing. We are aware, through the NERVTAG and PERFORM studies that singing can increase the risk of COVID-19 transmission through the spread of aerosol droplets.this was backed up by a consensus statement from SAGE, resulting in the suggested principles of safer singing being published.
We will continue to keep guidance and restrictions under review, in line with the changing situation. Further detail on step 4 will be set out as soon as possible.
Like all other mainstream state funded schools, schools designated with a religious character, commonly known as faith schools, must admit all children who apply, without reference to faith, where there are places available. Where they are oversubscribed, they may give priority for places to applicants on the basis of faith. No parent is required to provide information on their membership or practice of the faith when applying to a faith school, although they may not then be eligible for priority under any faith oversubscription criteria.
The Department does not intend to remove faith schools’ ability to set faith-based oversubscription criteria. Faith-based oversubscription criteria provide a means to support parents to have their children educated in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs, where they wish to do so.
The admission authority of a faith school is responsible for setting their admission arrangements and deciding whether or not to use faith-based oversubscription criteria.
The Department issues the statutory School Admissions Code which applies to all mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, and places requirements on admission authorities about their arrangements and what they may ask from parents as part of the admissions process. The Code also signposts other relevant laws which admission authorities must comply with, including the Human Rights Act 1998.
In constructing any faith oversubscription criteria, a faith school’s admission authority must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing the religion or religious denomination, to the extent that the guidance complies with the Code. They must also consult with the religious body when deciding how membership or practice of the faith is to be demonstrated. Ultimately, the admission authority must ensure its arrangements comply with the Code and other relevant legislation, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010.
Anyone who is concerned that a school’s admission arrangements are unfair or unlawful is encouraged to refer an objection to the independent Schools Adjudicator, whose decision is binding and enforceable. The Government does not routinely make an assessment of the impact of individual faith schools’ admissions criteria. All legislation, including admissions law, must be compatible with equalities and human rights law.
The Department has no current plans to introduce more specific requirements for faith school admissions beyond those already set out in law. The Department routinely considers reports and guidance from stakeholders and other bodies, such as the report issued by the National Secular Society. All such information helps to inform future policy development.
Like all other mainstream state funded schools, schools designated with a religious character, commonly known as faith schools, must admit all children who apply, without reference to faith, where there are places available. Where they are oversubscribed, they may give priority for places to applicants on the basis of faith. No parent is required to provide information on their membership or practice of the faith when applying to a faith school, although they may not then be eligible for priority under any faith oversubscription criteria.
The Department does not intend to remove faith schools’ ability to set faith-based oversubscription criteria. Faith-based oversubscription criteria provide a means to support parents to have their children educated in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs, where they wish to do so.
The admission authority of a faith school is responsible for setting their admission arrangements and deciding whether or not to use faith-based oversubscription criteria.
The Department issues the statutory School Admissions Code which applies to all mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, and places requirements on admission authorities about their arrangements and what they may ask from parents as part of the admissions process. The Code also signposts other relevant laws which admission authorities must comply with, including the Human Rights Act 1998.
In constructing any faith oversubscription criteria, a faith school’s admission authority must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing the religion or religious denomination, to the extent that the guidance complies with the Code. They must also consult with the religious body when deciding how membership or practice of the faith is to be demonstrated. Ultimately, the admission authority must ensure its arrangements comply with the Code and other relevant legislation, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010.
Anyone who is concerned that a school’s admission arrangements are unfair or unlawful is encouraged to refer an objection to the independent Schools Adjudicator, whose decision is binding and enforceable. The Government does not routinely make an assessment of the impact of individual faith schools’ admissions criteria. All legislation, including admissions law, must be compatible with equalities and human rights law.
The Department has no current plans to introduce more specific requirements for faith school admissions beyond those already set out in law. The Department routinely considers reports and guidance from stakeholders and other bodies, such as the report issued by the National Secular Society. All such information helps to inform future policy development.
Like all other mainstream state funded schools, schools designated with a religious character, commonly known as faith schools, must admit all children who apply, without reference to faith, where there are places available. Where they are oversubscribed, they may give priority for places to applicants on the basis of faith. No parent is required to provide information on their membership or practice of the faith when applying to a faith school, although they may not then be eligible for priority under any faith oversubscription criteria.
The Department does not intend to remove faith schools’ ability to set faith-based oversubscription criteria. Faith-based oversubscription criteria provide a means to support parents to have their children educated in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs, where they wish to do so.
The admission authority of a faith school is responsible for setting their admission arrangements and deciding whether or not to use faith-based oversubscription criteria.
The Department issues the statutory School Admissions Code which applies to all mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, and places requirements on admission authorities about their arrangements and what they may ask from parents as part of the admissions process. The Code also signposts other relevant laws which admission authorities must comply with, including the Human Rights Act 1998.
In constructing any faith oversubscription criteria, a faith school’s admission authority must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing the religion or religious denomination, to the extent that the guidance complies with the Code. They must also consult with the religious body when deciding how membership or practice of the faith is to be demonstrated. Ultimately, the admission authority must ensure its arrangements comply with the Code and other relevant legislation, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010.
Anyone who is concerned that a school’s admission arrangements are unfair or unlawful is encouraged to refer an objection to the independent Schools Adjudicator, whose decision is binding and enforceable. The Government does not routinely make an assessment of the impact of individual faith schools’ admissions criteria. All legislation, including admissions law, must be compatible with equalities and human rights law.
The Department has no current plans to introduce more specific requirements for faith school admissions beyond those already set out in law. The Department routinely considers reports and guidance from stakeholders and other bodies, such as the report issued by the National Secular Society. All such information helps to inform future policy development.
Like all other mainstream state funded schools, schools designated with a religious character, commonly known as faith schools, must admit all children who apply, without reference to faith, where there are places available. Where they are oversubscribed, they may give priority for places to applicants on the basis of faith. No parent is required to provide information on their membership or practice of the faith when applying to a faith school, although they may not then be eligible for priority under any faith oversubscription criteria.
The Department does not intend to remove faith schools’ ability to set faith-based oversubscription criteria. Faith-based oversubscription criteria provide a means to support parents to have their children educated in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs, where they wish to do so.
The admission authority of a faith school is responsible for setting their admission arrangements and deciding whether or not to use faith-based oversubscription criteria.
The Department issues the statutory School Admissions Code which applies to all mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, and places requirements on admission authorities about their arrangements and what they may ask from parents as part of the admissions process. The Code also signposts other relevant laws which admission authorities must comply with, including the Human Rights Act 1998.
In constructing any faith oversubscription criteria, a faith school’s admission authority must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing the religion or religious denomination, to the extent that the guidance complies with the Code. They must also consult with the religious body when deciding how membership or practice of the faith is to be demonstrated. Ultimately, the admission authority must ensure its arrangements comply with the Code and other relevant legislation, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010.
Anyone who is concerned that a school’s admission arrangements are unfair or unlawful is encouraged to refer an objection to the independent Schools Adjudicator, whose decision is binding and enforceable. The Government does not routinely make an assessment of the impact of individual faith schools’ admissions criteria. All legislation, including admissions law, must be compatible with equalities and human rights law.
The Department has no current plans to introduce more specific requirements for faith school admissions beyond those already set out in law. The Department routinely considers reports and guidance from stakeholders and other bodies, such as the report issued by the National Secular Society. All such information helps to inform future policy development.
Like all other mainstream state funded schools, schools designated with a religious character, commonly known as faith schools, must admit all children who apply, without reference to faith, where there are places available. Where they are oversubscribed, they may give priority for places to applicants on the basis of faith. No parent is required to provide information on their membership or practice of the faith when applying to a faith school, although they may not then be eligible for priority under any faith oversubscription criteria.
The Department does not intend to remove faith schools’ ability to set faith-based oversubscription criteria. Faith-based oversubscription criteria provide a means to support parents to have their children educated in line with their religious and philosophical beliefs, where they wish to do so.
The admission authority of a faith school is responsible for setting their admission arrangements and deciding whether or not to use faith-based oversubscription criteria.
The Department issues the statutory School Admissions Code which applies to all mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, and places requirements on admission authorities about their arrangements and what they may ask from parents as part of the admissions process. The Code also signposts other relevant laws which admission authorities must comply with, including the Human Rights Act 1998.
In constructing any faith oversubscription criteria, a faith school’s admission authority must have regard to any guidance from the body or person representing the religion or religious denomination, to the extent that the guidance complies with the Code. They must also consult with the religious body when deciding how membership or practice of the faith is to be demonstrated. Ultimately, the admission authority must ensure its arrangements comply with the Code and other relevant legislation, including the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Equality Act 2010.
Anyone who is concerned that a school’s admission arrangements are unfair or unlawful is encouraged to refer an objection to the independent Schools Adjudicator, whose decision is binding and enforceable. The Government does not routinely make an assessment of the impact of individual faith schools’ admissions criteria. All legislation, including admissions law, must be compatible with equalities and human rights law.
The Department has no current plans to introduce more specific requirements for faith school admissions beyond those already set out in law. The Department routinely considers reports and guidance from stakeholders and other bodies, such as the report issued by the National Secular Society. All such information helps to inform future policy development.
The majority of parents are offered a place at a school of their choice. In 2021, 98% of parents received an offer from one of their top three choices of primary school, while 93.4% received offers from one of their top three choices of secondary school.
The Department has not made an estimate of the number of pupils with no reasonable choice other than to attend a faith school due to a lack of secular provision in their area, or an estimate of the number of pupils unable to access their nearest school because of religiously selective admissions.
Local authorities have a duty to provide sufficient school places in their area. Faith schools have played an important role in our education system for many years. Faith schools are popular with parents and are more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as Good or Outstanding.
Faith schools are allowed to give priority to children of their faith where they are oversubscribed. Of those that do, some choose to allocate only a certain percentage of their places with reference to faith, while others do not have faith admissions criteria at all.
The majority of parents are offered a place at a school of their choice. In 2021, 98% of parents received an offer from one of their top three choices of primary school, while 93.4% received offers from one of their top three choices of secondary school.
The Department has not made an estimate of the number of pupils with no reasonable choice other than to attend a faith school due to a lack of secular provision in their area, or an estimate of the number of pupils unable to access their nearest school because of religiously selective admissions.
Local authorities have a duty to provide sufficient school places in their area. Faith schools have played an important role in our education system for many years. Faith schools are popular with parents and are more likely than other schools to be rated by Ofsted as Good or Outstanding.
Faith schools are allowed to give priority to children of their faith where they are oversubscribed. Of those that do, some choose to allocate only a certain percentage of their places with reference to faith, while others do not have faith admissions criteria at all.
Non-faith or community-ethos schools have different characteristics, particularly in relation to governance, compared to schools with a religious designation. Their secular character and ethos are protected regardless of which type of multi-academy trust they join.
The academy trust’s charitable object is to recognise and support a school’s individual ethos. This places an obligation on the trust and its board to ensure that a non-faith or community school’s character is safeguarded in a mixed multi-academy trust.
The supplemental funding agreement, a contract between my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Education, and academy trusts, has recently been updated to include clauses to protect the local governance arrangements of a non-faith or community school joining a mixed multi-academy trust.
The Department is giving due consideration to the implementation of the statutory relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) curriculum in the context of COVID-19. There is no intention to change the regulatory requirements for the implementation of RSHE.
The Department continues to work with key stakeholders and subject experts to develop a comprehensive programme of support for schools which includes a digital service to be delivered through GOV.UK.
The Department welcomes the Commission for Religious Education’s report and will carefully consider the merits of the report’s recommendations, one of which is to rename the subject ‘religion and worldviews’. At present, religious education is compulsory for pupils in all age groups in state-funded schools. It has an important role in developing children’s knowledge of the values and traditions of Britain and other countries, and in fostering understanding among different faiths and cultures.
The Department welcomes the Commission for Religious Education’s report and will carefully consider the merits of the report’s recommendations, one of which is to rename the subject ‘religion and worldviews’. At present, religious education is compulsory for pupils in all age groups in state-funded schools. It has an important role in developing children’s knowledge of the values and traditions of Britain and other countries, and in fostering understanding among different faiths and cultures.
Working Together to Safeguard Children (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children--2) sets out how local authorities should provide effective, evidence-based services to protect and promote the welfare of children, including disabled children. The guidance was updated on July 4 2018 and states that it is better to provide services addressing needs early, rather than reacting later. The statutory duty to provide short breaks, introduced in 2011, falls on local authorities. In the transition up to 2015, £880 million was provided to local authorities; funding for short breaks is now is an un-ring-fenced part of the wider local government finance settlement.
The 2015 Spending Review made available more than £200 billion until 2020 for councils to deliver the local services their communities want to see, including services for disabled children. In February, Parliament confirmed the 2018-19 settlement for local government which has provided a £1.3 billion increase in resources to local government over the next two years - £44.3 billion in 2017-18 to £45.6 billion in 2019-20. This recognises both the growing pressure on local government's services and higher-than-expected inflation levels.
The Department for Education has committed almost £270 million since 2014 in addition to the core local government funding settlement, to help local authorities learn from what works and to support improvement in the children's social care sector. This includes £200 million for the Innovation Programme, which is funding the Ealing project to provide interventions in the form of therapeutic breaks, to disabled children and young people that reduce the risk of escalation, and provide long-term solutions to children and families. Learning from innovation projects is published on the Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme website (http://innovationcsc.co.uk).
The government is conducting a review of the relative needs and resources of local authorities that will develop a robust, up-to-date approach to distributing funding across all local authorities in England at local government finance settlements, including for children’s services. To inform the review, the Department for Education and the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government have jointly-commissioned a data research and collection project on cost and demand pressures for children’s services, to understand local authorities’ relative funding needs. We are working towards implementation in 2020-21, while keeping this date under review as our work progresses.
Working Together to Safeguard Children (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children--2) sets out how local authorities should provide effective, evidence-based services to protect and promote the welfare of children, including disabled children. The guidance was updated on July 4 2018 and states that it is better to provide services addressing needs early, rather than reacting later. The statutory duty to provide short breaks, introduced in 2011, falls on local authorities. In the transition up to 2015, £880 million was provided to local authorities; funding for short breaks is now is an un-ring-fenced part of the wider local government finance settlement.
The 2015 Spending Review made available more than £200 billion until 2020 for councils to deliver the local services their communities want to see, including services for disabled children. In February, Parliament confirmed the 2018-19 settlement for local government which has provided a £1.3 billion increase in resources to local government over the next two years - £44.3 billion in 2017-18 to £45.6 billion in 2019-20. This recognises both the growing pressure on local government's services and higher-than-expected inflation levels.
The Department for Education has committed almost £270 million since 2014 in addition to the core local government funding settlement, to help local authorities learn from what works and to support improvement in the children's social care sector. This includes £200 million for the Innovation Programme, which is funding the Ealing project to provide interventions in the form of therapeutic breaks, to disabled children and young people that reduce the risk of escalation, and provide long-term solutions to children and families. Learning from innovation projects is published on the Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme website (http://innovationcsc.co.uk).
The government is conducting a review of the relative needs and resources of local authorities that will develop a robust, up-to-date approach to distributing funding across all local authorities in England at local government finance settlements, including for children’s services. To inform the review, the Department for Education and the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government have jointly-commissioned a data research and collection project on cost and demand pressures for children’s services, to understand local authorities’ relative funding needs. We are working towards implementation in 2020-21, while keeping this date under review as our work progresses.
All mainstream state funded schools, including faith schools, must comply with the School Admissions Code. This requires all admissions authorities to publish admission arrangements, which detail how, in the event of more applications than places, allocation of places will be prioritised. Admission authorities may choose to give priority to children living within a designated catchment area, but not all will set a catchment.
The savings announced by the Chancellor will come from a variety of measures including expected departmental underspends in demand-led budgets, efficiencies and some small budgetary reductions.
Decisions about how 16-19 institutions will be funded in the academic year 2016/17 and beyond will be subject to the outcome of the next spending review, which will set the budget for education and other public spending for the coming years.
Working Together to Safeguard Children (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/working-together-to-safeguard-children--2) sets out how local authorities should provide effective, evidence-based services to protect and promote the welfare of children, including disabled children. The guidance was updated on July 4 2018 and states that it is better to provide services addressing needs early, rather than reacting later. The statutory duty to provide short breaks, introduced in 2011, falls on local authorities. In the transition up to 2015, £880 million was provided to local authorities; funding for short breaks is now is an un-ring-fenced part of the wider local government finance settlement.
The 2015 Spending Review made available more than £200 billion until 2020 for councils to deliver the local services their communities want to see, including services for disabled children. In February, Parliament confirmed the 2018-19 settlement for local government which has provided a £1.3 billion increase in resources to local government over the next two years - £44.3 billion in 2017-18 to £45.6 billion in 2019-20. This recognises both the growing pressure on local government's services and higher-than-expected inflation levels.
The Department for Education has committed almost £270 million since 2014 in addition to the core local government funding settlement, to help local authorities learn from what works and to support improvement in the children's social care sector. This includes £200 million for the Innovation Programme, which is funding the Ealing project to provide interventions in the form of therapeutic breaks, to disabled children and young people that reduce the risk of escalation, and provide long-term solutions to children and families. Learning from innovation projects is published on the Children’s Social Care Innovation Programme website (http://innovationcsc.co.uk).
The government is conducting a review of the relative needs and resources of local authorities that will develop a robust, up-to-date approach to distributing funding across all local authorities in England at local government finance settlements, including for children’s services. To inform the review, the Department for Education and the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government have jointly-commissioned a data research and collection project on cost and demand pressures for children’s services, to understand local authorities’ relative funding needs. We are working towards implementation in 2020-21, while keeping this date under review as our work progresses.
The Secretary of State has regular discussions with the Government’s arm’s-length bodies, including the Food Standards Agency, on a range of issues.
In December 2021, Defra published research in collaboration with Middlesex University investigating measures to reduce dog attacks and promote responsible dog ownership. In response to this research, we have established a Responsible Dog Ownership working group involving police, local authorities and animal welfare organisations which is considering the report’s recommendations, including those relating to dog training. This research did not specifically address the impact of training on the number of dog attacks on sheep.
Currently it is an offence for a person to allow their dog to chase or attack livestock on any agricultural land – that includes where a dog is at large in a field or enclosure in which there are sheep.
The Government maintains that it is best practice to keep a dog on a lead around livestock. The Countryside Code advises dog walkers to always check local signs as there are situations where this is already a legal requirement for all or part of the year.
The statutory Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs includes guidance and reminders for owners about their responsibilities to provide for the welfare needs of their animals and to keep their dogs safe and under control. Natural England have also published a refreshed version of the Countryside Code, which helpfully sets out certain legal requirements and provides advice on controlling dogs around livestock.
Training dogs is important to help them learn to behave appropriately and to make it easier to keep them under control. It is important to seek professional advice to identify/discuss any behaviour problems and the best training options for your dog as an incorrect training regime can negatively affect a dog’s welfare. Reward based training which includes the use of things that dogs like or want is widely regarded as the preferred form of training dogs.
Defra’s codes of practice provide owners and keepers with information on how to meet the welfare needs of their animals, as required under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The codes of practice are kept under review and updated in line with legislative developments and changes in animal welfare practice.
The best proven method of preventing a dog from attacking livestock is to keep the dog on a lead when exercising around other animals, as advised by farmers and other keepers of livestock. The statutory Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs includes guidance on how to keep dogs safe and under control. The code is available here: Code of practice for the welfare of dogs - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)
Defra’s research into electric shock collars is available here: Science Search (defra.gov.uk) .
Following a consultation in 2018, and as set out in our Action Plan for Animal Welfare, the Government decided to ban electric shock collars controlled by hand-held devices in England, under new legislation which should be introduced this year, given their scope to harm cats and dogs.
We have listened carefully to a range of views from pet owners and respondents, as well as consulting key stakeholders including animal welfare charities, e-collar manufacturers, and trainers who use e-collars.
The proposed ban on the use of electric shock collars controlled by hand-held devices was developed after considering a broad range of factors, including the impact of a ban. When considered alongside the academic research, the public consultation responses, and direct engagement with the sector, the Government concluded that these types of electric shock collars present an unacceptable risk to the welfare of dogs and cats and that their use should not be permitted.
Defra-commissioned research (AW1402 and AW1402a) revealed that many e-collar users were not using them properly and in compliance with the manufacturers' instructions. As well as being misused to inflict unnecessary harm, there is also concern that e-collars can redirect aggression or generate anxiety-based behaviour in pets, making underlying behavioural and health problems worse.
The statutory Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs includes guidance and reminders for owners about their responsibilities to provide for the welfare needs of their animal, but also to keep their dogs safe and under control.
The Government takes the issue of livestock worrying very seriously, recognising the distress this can cause farmers and animals, as well as the financial implications. New measures to crack down on livestock worrying in England and Wales are to be brought in through the Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill, which was introduced in Parliament on 8 June 2021. The new measures will enhance enforcement mechanisms available to the police and expand the scope of livestock species and locations covered by the law.
Meanwhile we maintain that it is best practice to keep your dog on a lead around livestock. Natural England recently published a refreshed version of the Countryside Code, which highlights that it is best practice to keep dogs on a lead around livestock. The Code also makes specific reference to keeping dogs in sight and under control to make sure they stay away from livestock, wildlife, horses and other people unless invited. Moreover, the Code helpfully sets out certain legal requirements, encouraging visitors to always check local signs as there are locations where you must keep your dog on a lead around livestock for all or part of the year.
Following a consultation in 2018, and as set out in our Action Plan for Animal Welfare, the Government decided to ban electric shock collars controlled by hand-held devices in England under new legislation which should be introduced this year, given their scope to harm cats and dogs.
The proposed ban on the use of these electric shock collars was developed after considering a broad range of factors, including the impact of a ban. When considered alongside the academic research, the public consultation responses, and direct engagement with the sector, the Government concluded that these electric shock collars present an unacceptable risk to the welfare of dogs and cats and that their use should not be permitted.
I discussed the issue of colistin resistance on 1 December with the Chief Executive of the Veterinary Medicines Directorate following the publication of a report on the issue in relation to China.
In November, the UK Government attended an EU workshop on the impact on public health and animal health of the use of antibiotics in animals, which included the use of colistin. The Veterinary Medicines Directorate has also held initial discussions on the use of colistin and colistin resistance with other experts across government, including the Food Standards Agency, Department of Health and Public Health England, and key industry bodies.
Working on LGBT rights is essential to meet DFID’s vision of a world where no one is left behind. This is central to the Global Goals and a secure and prosperous world. Organisations implementing LGBT initiatives are facing significant challenges as a result of COVID-19. DFID supports many programmes on access to services for all, including vulnerable and persecuted minorities, promotion and protection of rights and tackling stigma and discrimination. These programmes include initiatives on LGBT inclusion. DFID is in discussion with partners to find flexible solutions to ensure they can use the resources allocated to implement these programmes effectively.
The UK Government works to ensure that all aid reaches the most vulnerable including lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people. Vulnerable populations will experience COVID 19 outbreaks differently. COVID 19 is likely to reinforce their marginalised position in society, their experience of discrimination, violence and stigma, and further limit their access to essential support and services. For this reason, on 9 April, further guidance was circulated across DFID highlighting that inclusion must be central to our response to COVID 19 and the specific contexts and needs of vulnerable people such as LGBT people should be taken into account when developing practical programmes to tackle COVID 19.
The programme support provided to Palestinian IT firms from the Palestinian Market Development Programme (PMDP) will cease in October 2018. The Department for International Development (DFID) has recently announced a new £38 million economic development programme for the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Part of this new programme will continue to provide support to Palestinian IT firms to connect with British businesses, for the twelve months following the completion of the PMDP. Following this, DFID will review if further support to the Palestinian IT sector is warranted and if the UK is best placed to support it.
The Department for International Development funds the Palestinian Market Development Programme (PMDP) which is currently supporting 18 Palestinian IT firms to strengthen their capability to work with British businesses. As part of this assistance PMDP is also working closely with the Portland Trust, the Palestinian Information Technology Association, the Palestinian Business Council and the Palestinian UK Country Trade Representative to develop business links between these firms and British businesses.
The Government attaches considerable importance to the current review of the World Bank’s Safeguards Framework. We have been strongly engaged throughout both with UK civil society organisations and the World Bank, most recently at UK consultation meetings on 19-20 January. At these, discussions with the Bank included a specific focus on how the safeguards will ensure proper consideration and risk management for vulnerable or disadvantaged groups such as women, the disabled and LGBT people. The Government will continue to raise these points as the review progresses.
From 19 July, arrivals who have been fully vaccinated through the UK vaccination programme (plus 14 days) will not have to self-isolate or take a day 8 test when travelling to England from amber list countries. There are no changes to the green or red list, or for those arriving from countries on these lists.
Decisions on Red, Amber or Green List assignment and associated border measures are taken by Ministers, who take into account the JBC risk assessments, alongside wider public health factors.
Key factors in the JBC risk assessment of each country include:
A summary of the JBC methodology is published on gov.uk, alongside key data that supports Ministers' decisions.
The Government published its Aviation Strategy 2050 consultation document in December 2018. Among other things, the document makes the case that airports are ‘unique’ multi-modal transport hubs, and should be recognised and treated as such.
As the document sets out, the Government believes that the provision and funding of surface access infrastructure and services to airports is primarily the responsibility of the airport operator. But where there are significant non-airport public user benefits from changes and enhancements to the infrastructure and services, the Government has made clear it would consider making a funding contribution to reflect these.
The Government will continue to review and update the current appraisal methodology to enable assessment of the validity of its funding policy.
The Aviation Strategy 2050 consultation is due to close on 20 June 2019, and the Government encourages all stakeholders to respond to this consultation.
The Honourable Gentleman’s letter was received by the department on 24 December, and we aim to respond to all correspondence within 20 working days. However, I am pleased to confirm that I have already responded.
Information regarding these payments are published on Network Rail’s website - http://www.networkrail.co.uk/transparency/datasets/ - covering the years up to 2015/16. 2016/17 is not yet available and will be published in due course.