Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.
e-Petitions are administered by Parliament and allow members of the public to express support for a particular issue.
If an e-petition reaches 10,000 signatures the Government will issue a written response.
If an e-petition reaches 100,000 signatures the petition becomes eligible for a Parliamentary debate (usually Monday 4.30pm in Westminster Hall).
These initiatives were driven by Emily Thornberry, 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.
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
The Electoral Commission has to date never brought criminal prosecutions. The measures in the Elections Bill simply maintain the status quo.
The Elections Bill clarifies that the Electoral Commission should not bring criminal prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and provides that this should remain the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland which are already experts in this domain. Having the Commission perform this function would risk wasting public money by duplicating the work of the prosecution authorities. We are committed instead to supporting the police and prosecution authorities as necessary to enforce electoral regulation proactively and effectively.
As a result, the Government does not anticipate that this measure will result in any impact on prosecution rates or any costs.
The Bill makes no changes to the Commission’s investigatory powers. The Electoral Commission will continue to have a wide range of investigatory and civil sanctioning powers available to it and, as is currently the case, it will continue to be able to refer matters to the police and the prosecution authorities.
More generally, the Government will invest an additional £80 million per year in the Crown Prosecution Service by 2025. This will allow for the recruitment of additional frontline staff to deal with all types of casework, including electoral offences.
The Electoral Commission has to date never brought criminal prosecutions. The measures in the Elections Bill simply maintain the status quo.
The Elections Bill clarifies that the Electoral Commission should not bring criminal prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and provides that this should remain the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland which are already experts in this domain. Having the Commission perform this function would risk wasting public money by duplicating the work of the prosecution authorities. We are committed instead to supporting the police and prosecution authorities as necessary to enforce electoral regulation proactively and effectively.
As a result, the Government does not anticipate that this measure will result in any impact on prosecution rates or any costs.
The Bill makes no changes to the Commission’s investigatory powers. The Electoral Commission will continue to have a wide range of investigatory and civil sanctioning powers available to it and, as is currently the case, it will continue to be able to refer matters to the police and the prosecution authorities.
More generally, the Government will invest an additional £80 million per year in the Crown Prosecution Service by 2025. This will allow for the recruitment of additional frontline staff to deal with all types of casework, including electoral offences.
The Electoral Commission has to date never brought criminal prosecutions. The measures in the Elections Bill simply maintain the status quo.
The Elections Bill clarifies that the Electoral Commission should not bring criminal prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and provides that this should remain the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland which are already experts in this domain. Having the Commission perform this function would risk wasting public money by duplicating the work of the prosecution authorities. We are committed instead to supporting the police and prosecution authorities as necessary to enforce electoral regulation proactively and effectively.
As a result, the Government does not anticipate that this measure will result in any impact on prosecution rates or any costs.
The Bill makes no changes to the Commission’s investigatory powers. The Electoral Commission will continue to have a wide range of investigatory and civil sanctioning powers available to it and, as is currently the case, it will continue to be able to refer matters to the police and the prosecution authorities.
More generally, the Government will invest an additional £80 million per year in the Crown Prosecution Service by 2025. This will allow for the recruitment of additional frontline staff to deal with all types of casework, including electoral offences.
The Electoral Commission has to date never brought criminal prosecutions. The measures in the Elections Bill simply maintain the status quo.
The Elections Bill clarifies that the Electoral Commission should not bring criminal prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and provides that this should remain the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland which are already experts in this domain. Having the Commission perform this function would risk wasting public money by duplicating the work of the prosecution authorities. We are committed instead to supporting the police and prosecution authorities as necessary to enforce electoral regulation proactively and effectively.
As a result, the Government does not anticipate that this measure will result in any impact on prosecution rates or any costs.
The Bill makes no changes to the Commission’s investigatory powers. The Electoral Commission will continue to have a wide range of investigatory and civil sanctioning powers available to it and, as is currently the case, it will continue to be able to refer matters to the police and the prosecution authorities.
More generally, the Government will invest an additional £80 million per year in the Crown Prosecution Service by 2025. This will allow for the recruitment of additional frontline staff to deal with all types of casework, including electoral offences.
The Electoral Commission has to date never brought criminal prosecutions. The measures in the Elections Bill simply maintain the status quo.
The Elections Bill clarifies that the Electoral Commission should not bring criminal prosecutions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and provides that this should remain the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service and Public Prosecution Service Northern Ireland which are already experts in this domain. Having the Commission perform this function would risk wasting public money by duplicating the work of the prosecution authorities. We are committed instead to supporting the police and prosecution authorities as necessary to enforce electoral regulation proactively and effectively.
As a result, the Government does not anticipate that this measure will result in any impact on prosecution rates or any costs.
The Bill makes no changes to the Commission’s investigatory powers. The Electoral Commission will continue to have a wide range of investigatory and civil sanctioning powers available to it and, as is currently the case, it will continue to be able to refer matters to the police and the prosecution authorities.
More generally, the Government will invest an additional £80 million per year in the Crown Prosecution Service by 2025. This will allow for the recruitment of additional frontline staff to deal with all types of casework, including electoral offences.
Since 1 January 2021, Litigation Group has continued to provide litigation services to the majority of government departments, including the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, and executive agencies, as well as many non-departmental public bodies.
The Group’s work encompasses litigation in public and private law as well as supporting public inquiries and acting in Inquests. This has involved, amongst other things, attending in a wide range of courts, including Coroners’ Courts, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, the Royal Courts of Justice and the Supreme Court. Our Employment and Commercial Groups similarly provide litigation services to the majority of government departments and have done so in the period in question.
Membership of the Gender Equality Advisory Council is voluntary and unpaid.
This Government is fully committed to fulfilling our obligations under international agreements, and remains steadfast in its commitment to advance gender equality and women and girls’ rights.
Our landmark Domestic Abuse Bill is on track to achieve Royal Assent by the end of April 2021 and represents our determination to tackle this abhorrent crime. We remain determined to better protect and support the victims of abuse and their children and bring perpetrators to justice.
Importantly, provision within this Bill brings us even closer to compliance with the Istanbul Convention and this Government’s commitment to ratifying it, as set out in the most recent annual report on progress towards ratification published by the Home Office in October 2020.
This Government is committed to delivering an international LGBT conference that will bring together governments from around the world, international civil society, businesses and Parliamentarians to address the safety of LGBT people at home and abroad.
Safe To Be Me: A Global Equality Conference was planned to take place in London between 27 and 29 May 2020.
Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Conference had to be postponed. We are considering a variety of alternative options on how we can address this commitment in a way that is fit-for-purpose and safe for our delegates. We will be announcing the rescheduled dates shortly, followed by the programme and invitations in due course.
Under the UK G7 Presidency, the Prime Minister has reconvened the Gender Equality Advisory Council (GEAC). I am delighted to act as Ministerial Lead working with the independent Council and building on the foundations laid by the Canadian and French G7 presidencies, and to champion the core principles of freedom, opportunity, individual humanity and dignity for women around the world.
The Government remains deeply committed to tackling global poverty and helping to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Despite the economic challenges we face, the UK will remain a major donor spending 0.5 per cent of GNI on Overseas Development Aid (ODA).
The Foreign Secretary’s Strategic Framework for UK ODA announced in the House on 26 November 2020 will see us focus on global challenges where the UK can make the most impact: on climate change and biodiversity; girls’ education; COVID and global health security; on open societies, conflict resolution, humanitarian crises and trade and economic development.
FCDO supports a range of programmes that promote the importance of data to inform policy-making and programme delivery focused on the needs of the most vulnerable. Having joined the Inclusive Data Charter last year, we will produce an Action Plan on improving the quality, quantity, financing, and availability of inclusive and disaggregated data, as well as the capacity and capability to produce and use it.
The Prime Minister has made absolutely clear our continued commitment to stand up for the right of every girl to 12 years of quality education. ODA spending is only one of our tools in achieving our ambitions; this year we will be co-hosting the Global Partnership for Education Replenishment with Kenya and using our G7 Presidency to rally the international community to step up support to girls’ education.
Neither of the Law Officers Department’s responsible for prosecuting fraud cases, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), hold data requested. Reported crime data is collated and held by the Home Office.
The SFO receives approximately 1,200 referrals of alleged criminality every year. These range in seriousness and come from a variety of sources, including the public, whistle-blowers and corporate referrals.
Every referral received is researched and/or assessed to help determine if it is a matter that the SFO should investigate.
The SFO only takes on only the most complex fraud and bribery cases. Should a referral not meet the reasonable suspicion threshold and the Director’s Statement of Principle, it may be referred to another law enforcement agency or discontinued.
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) does not hold the data on the estimated value of fraud reported to the Office over the last 10 years.
Referrals received by the SFO, whilst alleging crime, often do not provide an estimate of loss or actual loss reported. Identifying the true value of reported fraud requires investigation.
The SFO is committed to supporting the victims of fraud, bribery or corruption.
The SFO receives approximately 1,200 referrals of alleged criminality every year. These range in seriousness and come from a variety of sources, including the public, whistle-blowers and corporate referrals.
Every referral received is researched and/or assessed to help determine if it is a matter that the SFO should investigate.
The SFO only takes on only the most complex fraud and bribery cases. Should a referral not meet the reasonable suspicion threshold and the Director’s Statement of Principle, it may be referred to another law enforcement agency or discontinued.
The Serious Fraud Office does not hold data on reported fraud cases to other law enforcement agencies.
In April 2022, The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) launched a new Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate (SEOCID) which brings together specialists in economic crime, organised crime, proceeds of crime and international to deliver justice, combat crime across borders and take money from criminals.
This combined team of specialists will continue to work closely with investigators to disrupt the emerging threats of organised criminal gangs using cyber technology to exploit people, businesses, and the Government. Victims of complex SEOCID cases are often based in multiple jurisdictions. The directorate will work to improve their experience by ensuring investigators and prosecutors work closely and have a joint victim and witness strategy from the outset.
Establishing the new Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate is part of the CPS Economic Crime Strategy 2025.
The number of staff and prosecutors can be found in the table below:
Department | Head Count | FTE | HC of Prosecutors | FTE of Prosecutors |
SERIOUS ECONOMIC ORGANISED CRIME INTERNATIONAL (SEOCID) | 394 | 372.38 | 186.00 | 177.65 |
SPECIAL CRIME AND COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 146 | 140.29 | 69.00 | 67.10 |
Grand Total | 540 | 512.66 | 255.00 | 244.76 |
NB: The data has been extracted from the CPS Oracle HR database and is accurate at point of enquiry on 21 April 2022. Consequent changes to data input may mean that this data will change at some point in the future.
*The system reports data as at the last day of the month rather than the first or any date in-between therefore the table is presented to the nearest reportable date to the questions asked.
*FTE figures have been rounded
The number of staff employed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) during the periods specified is available in the table below. The data provided includes all staff grades full time equivalent averaged across each year. During this period the CPS has undertaken continuous improvement and modernisation programmes to improve efficiency and effectiveness. These included digitalisation, development of a national resourcing model, standard operating practices, resource efficiency measures, smarter/remote working practices, and establishment of remote teams. As a national service for England and Wales, the consequence of these measures is that we now have the ability to shift work to where capacity resides which is both much more efficient, and also fairer on the workforce.
Financial Year | Average Full Time Equivalent Staff |
2010/11 | 7797 |
2011/12 | 7214 |
2012/13 | 6894 |
2013/14 | 6341 |
2014/15 | 5939 |
2015/16 | 5541 |
2016/17 | 5468 |
2017/18 | 5517 |
2018/19 | 5493 |
2019/20 | 5577 |
2020/21 | 5943 |
2021/22 | 6406 |
NB: The data has been extracted from the CPS Oracle HR database and is accurate at point of enquiry on 21 April 2022. Consequent changes to data input may mean that this data will change at some point in the future.
*The system reports data as at the last day of the month rather than the first or any date in-between therefore the table is presented to the nearest reportable date to the questions asked.
The average number of whole-time equivalent persons employed during each financial year (for which data is available) in the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and Government Legal Department (GLD) is as follows.
Attorney General’s Office:
Financial Year | Total | Permanent Staff | Others | Ministers |
2010-11 | (Data not held)* |
|
|
|
2011-12 | 40 |
|
|
|
2012-13 | 44 | 40 | 2 | 2 |
2013-14 | 42 | 40 |
| 2 |
2014-15 | 40 | 38 |
| 2 |
2015-16 | 40 | 38 |
| 2 |
2016-17 | 40 | 38 |
| 2 |
2017-18 | 44 | 42 |
| 2 |
2018-19 | 46 | 39 | 5 | 2 |
2019-20 | 49 | 47 |
| 2 |
2020-21 | 50 | 46 | 2 | 2 |
Treasury Solicitor’s Office (from 2010-11 to 2014-15 inclusive) and Government Legal Department (from 2015-16 to 2020-21 inclusive):
Financial Year | Total | Permanent Staff | Others |
2010-11 | (Data not held)* |
|
|
2011-12 | 987 |
|
|
2012-13 | 1,046 | 927 | 119 |
2013-14 | 1,283 | 1,090 | 193 |
2014-15 | 1,667 | 1,426 | 241 |
2015-16 | 1,838 | 1,663 | 175 |
2016-17 | 1,862 | 1,657 | 205 |
2017-18 | 2,157 | 1,905 | 252 |
2018-19 | 2,362 | 1,998 | 364 |
2019-20 | 2,519 | 2,196 | 323 |
2020-21 | 2,605 | 2,166 | 439 |
It is important to note that several legal advisory units from departments across the civil service were incorporated into the Treasury Solicitor’s Department (TSol) and GLD account for the majority of staffing increases in the years preceding and succeeding the name change from TSol to GLD on 1 April 2015.
* The earliest Annual Report available in which these figures are published, is for the 2012-13 financial year, which also included a total whole-time equivalent figure for TSol and AGO for 2011-12.
The Attorney General Office are working with the Government Legal Department and Crown Prosecution Service to finalise data on apprenticeships for 2021/22. Final figures are not yet available. The Cabinet Office, on behalf of the Civil Service, will be publishing a full breakdown of departmental performance on apprenticeships in the Autumn in line with previous years.
Data for all departments between 2017 and 2021 is available on gov.uk and shows the Attorney Generals departments recruited 278 apprentices, equivalent to 3.2% during 2020/21.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of prosecutions for thefts from retail or wholesale premises. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
While the CPS does not centrally collate data showing the number of people prosecuted for thefts from shops, data is available showing the number of offences of shop theft, charged by way of Section 1 of the Theft Act 1968, in which a prosecution commenced at magistrates’ courts. The table below provides this information for the years 2017-18 and 2020-21.
| 2017-2018 | 2020-2021 |
Theft Act 1968 {1(1) and 7} - Theft from shops | 101,435 | 47,601 |
Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System |
|
The figures relate to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It may be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence. No data are held on the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of prosecutions based on the occupation of complainants, including shopworkers who were assaulted or threatened. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
The Memorandum of Cooperation signed by the Attorney General and the Ukrainian Prosecutor General was published on Gov.uk on the 13th of March 2022.
The Memorandum is available here.
There have been no Ministerial-level meetings (either Minister-Minister or Minister-Officials) between the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and Her Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) between 1 January 2017 and 16 March 2022 to discuss (a) cy-près schemes or (b) charitable contributions to reduce the national debt.
The AGO does not hold official records of any meetings at official level between AGO and HMT between the 1st of January 2017 and the 16th of March 2022.
There have been no Ministerial-level meetings (either Minister-Minister or Minister-Officials) between the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and Her Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) between 1 January 2017 and 16 March 2022 to discuss (a) cy-près schemes or (b) charitable contributions to reduce the national debt.
The AGO does not hold official records of any meetings at official level between AGO and HMT between the 1st of January 2017 and the 16th of March 2022.
There have been no Ministerial-level meetings (either Minister-Minister or Minister-Officials) between the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) and Her Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) between 1 January 2017 and 16 March 2022 to discuss (a) cy-près schemes or (b) charitable contributions to reduce the national debt.
The AGO does not hold official records of any meetings at official level between AGO and HMT between the 1st of January 2017 and the 16th of March 2022.
In March 2021, the CPS launched its first ever Economic Crime Strategy to ensure we keep pace with the changing nature of crime. It is a high-level strategy which allows the flexibility to respond and adapt to new and emerging threats.
The CPS currently has a dedicated Specialist Fraud Division with specialist prosecutors to ensure it has the right skills and resources to prosecute complex economic crime cases, ranging from the prosecution of bankers and investment scams, to the prosecution of those who seek to defraud the taxpayer of millions of pounds.
With effect from the 1 April 2022, a new Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate will be launched, merging the Specialist Fraud Division and the International Justice and Organised Crime Division. This new directorate will provide more resilience and will be responsible for prosecuting the new offences established in the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill.
In March 2021, the CPS launched its first ever Economic Crime Strategy to ensure we keep pace with the changing nature of crime. It is a high-level strategy which allows the flexibility to respond and adapt to new and emerging threats.
The CPS currently has a dedicated Specialist Fraud Division with specialist prosecutors to ensure it has the right skills and resources to prosecute complex economic crime cases, ranging from the prosecution of bankers and investment scams, to the prosecution of those who seek to defraud the taxpayer of millions of pounds.
With effect from the 1 April 2022, a new Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate will be launched, merging the Specialist Fraud Division and the International Justice and Organised Crime Division. This new directorate will provide more resilience and will be responsible for prosecuting the new offences established in the Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill.
Data on the number of offences recorded under the Modern Slavery Act 2015 is captured in police recorded crime data and this information is available from the Home Office. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not hold recorded crime data and therefore it is not possible to say how many recorded offences subsequently resulted in a prosecution or conviction.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of the date an offence was committed. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.
Between the 25th of April and the 31st of December 2013, no Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) were signed by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), as DPAs were only introduced on 24th of February 2014, under the provisions of Schedule 17 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. Since then, the SFO has entered into a total of 12 DPAs.
During the period of the 25th of April 2013 and the 13th of December 2013, 9 SFO led prosecutions resulted in a conviction. All of these were brought against individuals. There were no prosecutions brought against corporate entities during this period.
Detailed information regarding SFO prosecutions and DPAs can be found on their website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/.
Between the 25th of April and the 31st of December 2013, no Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) were signed by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO), as DPAs were only introduced on 24th of February 2014, under the provisions of Schedule 17 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013. Since then, the SFO has entered into a total of 12 DPAs.
During the period of the 25th of April 2013 and the 13th of December 2013, 9 SFO led prosecutions resulted in a conviction. All of these were brought against individuals. There were no prosecutions brought against corporate entities during this period.
Detailed information regarding SFO prosecutions and DPAs can be found on their website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/.
Since Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) were introduced in 2014, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has signed a total of 12. The table below provides details of the number of DPAs signed each year since their introduction in 2014.
Year | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | Total |
DPAs signed | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Since 2010, 122 SFO led prosecutions have resulted in a conviction. The table below provides details of the number of prosecutions that led to a conviction in each year since 2010, and whether these relate to a corporate entity or an individual. |
| 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | total | |||||
Corporate | 1 |
|
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 2 | 8 | |||||
Individuals | 1 | 8 | 20 | 14 | 17 | 5 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 114 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total | 2 | 8 | 20 | 14 | 18 | 6 | 10 | 13 | 20 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 122 |
|
|
|
|
|
In 2022, the SFO is taking forward 7 trials, involving 20 defendants charged against a total of 80 counts. The high volume of trials taking place this year is in part a result of trials not being able to go ahead during the pandemic.
Detailed information regarding SFO prosecutions and DPAs can be found on their website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/.
Since Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) were introduced in 2014, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has signed a total of 12. The table below provides details of the number of DPAs signed each year since their introduction in 2014.
Year | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | Total |
DPAs signed | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 12 |
Since 2010, 122 SFO led prosecutions have resulted in a conviction. The table below provides details of the number of prosecutions that led to a conviction in each year since 2010, and whether these relate to a corporate entity or an individual. |
| 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | total | |||||
Corporate | 1 |
|
|
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
|
| 2 | 8 | |||||
Individuals | 1 | 8 | 20 | 14 | 17 | 5 | 9 | 12 | 19 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 114 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total | 2 | 8 | 20 | 14 | 18 | 6 | 10 | 13 | 20 | 5 | 2 | 4 | 122 |
|
|
|
|
|
In 2022, the SFO is taking forward 7 trials, involving 20 defendants charged against a total of 80 counts. The high volume of trials taking place this year is in part a result of trials not being able to go ahead during the pandemic.
Detailed information regarding SFO prosecutions and DPAs can be found on their website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/.
Over the five-year period of 2016 to 2021, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) opened almost 50 cases. The SFO proactively publishes information about its criminal investigations on its website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/our-cases/ whenever it is appropriate to do. This includes details on when the investigation was opened and whether it relates to individuals or a corporate body.
In order to protect the investigative process, it is not always possible - or even desirable - for the SFO to announce investigations prematurely. Because of the small number of live investigations that the SFO has open at any one time and the covert nature of many of them, disclosing a breakdown of numbers and the focus of each, could potentially compromise ongoing efforts.
The SFO investigates and prosecutes the most serious and complex cases of fraud, bribery, and corruption. The size and complexity of those cases, including the volume of victims and witnesses, means that it can take a number of years for a full investigation to be carried out.
From the 1st of January 2016 to 31st of December 2021, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has brought forward 103 prosecutions as a result of their criminal casework. The table below sets-out how many prosecutions were brought forward in each year, whether they relate to a corporate or an individual, and the final outcome. *
The cases investigated by the SFO are complex and it can take a number of years before any defendant(s) can be charged and a trial scheduled. Information relating to the exact date each investigation began is not readily available and providing this information would incur a disproportionate cost.
Corporate | Individual | |||||||
Outcome | Outcome | |||||||
Year | guilty plea | Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) | Discontinued | Conviction after trial | Guilty Plea | Acquitted | Awaiting Trial | Total |
2016 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 27 | ||
2017 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 11 | 5 | 10 | 1 | 31 |
2018 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 8 | |||
2019 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 9 | ||
2020 | 1 | 3 | 14 | 18 | ||||
2021 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 10 | |||
Total | 4 | 11 | 2 | 20 | 18 | 26 | 22 | 103 |
*We have used the term ‘brought forward’ to mean the date a charge was instigated against an individual or corporate.Detailed information regarding SFO prosecutions, including the date a charge was instigated can be found on their website: https://www.sfo.gov.uk/our-cases/
From 1st of January 2016 to 31st of December 2021, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) entered into a total of 11 Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs). The table below provides details of the date each DPA was signed.
Case name | Date DPA was signed by the SFO |
Sarclad Ltd | 06/07/2016 |
Rolls Royce PLC | 17/01/2017 |
Tesco PLC | 10/04/2017 |
Serco | 04/07/2019 |
Güralp Systems Ltd | 22/10/2019 |
Airbus Group | 31/01/2020 |
G4S | 17/07/2020 |
Airline Services Limited | 30/10/2020 |
Amec Foster Wheeler plc | 01/07/2021 |
AB Ltd* | 19/07/2021 |
CD Ltd* | 19/07/2021 |
* reporting restrictions apply
Detailed information regarding the use of DPAs can be found on the SFO website:
Edenred is the sole supplier of employee benefits and reward solutions under the Crown Commercial Service’s Employee Benefits Framework. Edenred supplies the Government Legal Department with both employee benefits and reward solutions, including childcare vouchers, a cycle to work scheme, payroll giving, employee discounts and reward and recognition bonuses. Edenred invoiced Government Legal Department £25,890 for providing reward and recognition bonuses to Government Legal Department, Attorney General’s Office and HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate employees during October 2021. Bonuses may take the form of paper vouchers, eGift Cards and Gift Cards.
334 bonuses of a value of between £30.00 and £100.00 were awarded to staff in October 2021, the average (mean) value of which was £73.79 and the most frequent (mode) value was £100.00. Employees receive the full value of the bonus and there is no additional cost for using the service.
The material requested was published on the official government website on 13th December 2021.
The decisions on these cases will be published in the next round of updates.
The Data set out in the table below shows CPS headcount (a) overall, (b) in the International Justice and Organised Crime Division, (c) in the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division and (d) in the Specialist Fraud Division as close to those dates specified.
Year / CPS Overall Headcount | Team | CPS Prosecutor Headcount |
31/12/2015* / 5922 | ORGANISED CRIME | 83 |
INTERNATIONAL | 37 | |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 177 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 224 | |
31/12/2016* / 5954 | ORGANISED CRIME | 150 |
INTERNATIONAL | 39 | |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 171 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 210 | |
31/12/2017* / 5989 | INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE AND ORGANISED CRIME DIVISION | 164 |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 155 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 221 | |
31/12/2018* / 5946 | INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE AND ORGANISED CRIME DIVISION | 172 |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 156 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 207 | |
31/12/2019* / 6066 | INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE AND ORGANISED CRIME DIVISION | 183 |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 155 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 180 | |
31/12/2020* / 6594 | INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE AND ORGANISED CRIME DIVISION | 134 |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 143 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 182 | |
31/12/2021* / 6888 | INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE AND ORGANISED CRIME DIVISION | 137 |
SPECIAL CRIME & COUNTER TERRORISM DIVISION | 141 | |
SPECIALIST FRAUD | 167 |
NB: The CPS has undergone change to its team structures during the specified period. The International Justice and Organised Crime Division has been in existence since 2017. Therefore, staff headcount numbers for 2015 and 2016 relate to the previous structure in place at the time.
*The system reports data as at the last day of the month rather than the first or any date in-between therefore the table is presented to the nearest reportable date to the questions asked.
The Solicitor General communicated his decision to officials on the morning of 24 December 2021. Where a referral is made to this office by a victim, their family or a Member of Parliament, the Law Officers communicate the outcome of their decision in writing. This case was referred by members of the public. Due to the volume of referrals received, we are unable to provide individual responses to members of the public. The outcomes of all decisions are communicated to the Crown Prosecution Service who in turn advise others concerned.
There is no legal obligation to publish updates on the outcome of unduly lenient sentence referrals. The updates prepared by officials are checked manually and it is not always possible to meet the Attorney General’s aspiration for weekly editions, especially over the Christmas and New Year period. The Department does not hold information on the average length of time for updates
There is no legal obligation to publish updates on the outcome of unduly lenient sentence referrals. The updates prepared by officials are checked manually and it is not always possible to meet the Attorney General’s aspiration for weekly editions, especially over the Christmas and New Year period. The Department does not hold information on the average length of time for updates
The Solicitor General communicated his decision to officials on the morning of 24 December 2021.
Neither the Attorney General nor the Crown Prosecution Service set maximum limits for the amount of time a criminal case should await trial.
Neither the Attorney General nor the Crown Prosecution Service set maximum limits for the number of criminal cases awaiting trial.
The number of prosecutors employed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are as follows:
Year*** | CPS Prosecutor Headcount |
31/12/2016 | 2623 |
31/12/2017 | 2634 |
31/12/2018 | 2694 |
31/12/2019 | 2800 |
31/12/2020 | 3025 |
30/11/3021 | 3118 |
*The data has been extracted from the CPS Oracle HR database and is accurate at point of enquiry on 14th December 2021. Consequent changes to data input may mean that this data will change at some point in the future.
**The system reports data as at the last day of the month rather than the first therefore the table is presented to the nearest reportable date to the questions asked.
In my roles as chief legal adviser to the Government and sponsoring minister of the Government Legal Department (GLD), I oversee the provision of legal support by GLD to all of its client departments, including the Cabinet Office. When advising their clients, GLD lawyers provide advice in accordance with their professional duties and on behalf of the Treasury Solicitor, who is the head of the GLD. The Ministerial Code and Cabinet Manual set out the circumstances in which ministers and their policy officials consult the Law Officers on legal matters.
In my roles as chief legal adviser to the Government and sponsoring minister of the Government Legal Department (GLD), I oversee the provision of legal support by GLD to all of its client departments, including the Cabinet Office. When advising their clients, GLD lawyers provide advice in accordance with their professional duties and on behalf of the Treasury Solicitor, who is the head of the GLD. The Ministerial Code and Cabinet Manual set out the circumstances in which ministers and their policy officials consult the Law Officers on legal matters.
By convention, whether the Law Officers have been asked to provide advice, and the contents of any such advice, is not disclosed outside Government.
The Convention protects the Law Officers’ ability as chief legal adviser to the Government to give full and frank legal advice and provides the fullest guarantee that government business will be conducted at all times in light of thorough and candid legal advice.
By convention, whether the Law Officers have been asked to provide advice, and the contents of any such advice, is not disclosed outside Government.
The Convention protects the Law Officers’ ability as chief legal adviser to the Government to give full and frank legal advice and provides the fullest guarantee that government business will be conducted at all times in light of thorough and candid legal advice.
This information is not centrally held in the form requested, and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
At this time we are unable to confirm when information on Free School Meals will be available from the April 2022 SCS Database, and whether declaration rates for broader SEB measures will reach acceptable quality thresholds.
The Cabinet Office continues to work with departments to increase response rates across socio-economic background measures.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Rt hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Rt hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
It has not proved possible to respond to the Rt hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
The Declaration on Government Reform and the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy, 2022-2025, commits the Government to drawing on talent from all backgrounds. Representation is increasing and whilst this trend is positive, we remain committed to improving representation across the broadest range of diversity across our workforce and in particular at our most senior grades.
To build on the progress made over recent years and target where improvement is still needed, the Government will take a holistic approach to SCS recruitment to identify and remove barriers to underrepresented groups entering and progressing in the SCS. There are a number of initiatives aimed at supporting colleagues to reach the Senior Civil Service from a diverse range of backgrounds including the Civil Service Fast Stream, Future Leaders Scheme and Senior Leaders Scheme.
Information on the diversity of the Senior Civil Service for 2022, sourced from the SCS Database, is not yet available. In responding to these PQs we have, therefore, used the latest available finalised annual SCS Database which is as at 1 April 2021.
All figures are a percentage of only those SCS that have made a positive declaration (i.e. they do not include prefer not to say, not known or not applicable responses in the denominator).
SCS by ethnicity, as at 1 April 2021
Ethnicity | Percentage of SCS (where ethnicity is known) |
White | 91.8% |
Black | 1.4% |
Asian | 4.2% |
Mixed | 1.8% |
Other | 0.8% |
SCS by age, as at 1 April 2021
Age category | Percentage of SCS (where age is known) |
Below 35 | 4.8% |
35-44 | 34.1% |
45-54 | 38.4% |
55-64 | 21.5% |
65+ | 1.1% |
SCS by sex, as at 1 April 2021
The SCS Database currently only captures data on the sex of individuals. As at 1 April 2021, 47.3% of SCS members, where sex has been provided, were reported as women, with 52.7% reported as men. At present, data is not collected in the SCS database on gender.
Entry year to the Civil Service for SCS, as at 1 April 2021
Date of entry | Percentage of SCS (where entry date known) |
Before 1980 | 1.1% |
1980-89 | 11.9% |
1990-99 | 16.9% |
2000-2009 | 37.7% |
2010 or later | 32.4% |
SCS who were members of the Fast Stream, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 20.4% of SCS members, where Fast Stream status has been provided, responded that they were successful in the Central Fast Stream selection process. This figure will also include members that were successful in applying to the Central Fast Stream after their initial entry to the Civil Service.
SCS holding university degrees, as of 1 April 2021
As at 1 April 2021, 11.2% of SCS, where degree status is known, did not have a university degree.
For those with a degree, where degree status and University is known:
80.1% did not obtain their first degree at Oxford or Cambridge University,
63.1% did not obtain their first degree at a non-oxbridge Russell Group university, and
56.8% did not obtain their first degree at a non-Russell Group UK university, and
98.0% did not obtain their first degree at a non-UK university.
SCS by socio-economic background, as of 1 April 2021
Response rates in the SCS Database to questions relating to Socio Economic Background are currently below acceptable quality thresholds. It is therefore not possible to provide data on SCS by :
Self-declared socio-economic background;
Formal educational qualification of parents;
Type of secondary school attended;
Parental occupation; and
Eligibility for free school meals.
G-GBNI was painted with the ‘Global UK’ livery and G-XATW had this livery removed during the visits to Southend Airport as part of a planned exchange of two identical airframes in line with contractual agreements/obligations.
HM Government has only leased one airframe and I can confirm that there was no extra cost to the taxpayer.
It is a long-established practice of Her Majesty's Government not to comment on whether a leak inquiry has been established, its conduct or outcome.
Transaction (a) relates to the replacement of official catering equipment and was purchased on the 07/07/2020. The equipment was procured to replace a previous equipment that was over 10 years old and which originally had been purchased under the last Labour Government. It had reached the end of its working life.
Transaction (b) relates to a high-specification shredder and was purchased on the 30/09/2020. The shredder was procured for a high-security business unit whose work necessitates specific secure shredding equipment. Again, this was a replacement for a previous device.
Transactions purchased via a Government Procurement Card must be reconciled and approved by a line manager before being recorded fully on the Department’s General Ledger. This means some transactions can appear after the purchase date.
The review of retained EU law, led by the Cabinet Office, is continuing. Officials are working to deliver the cross Whitehall review and are working closely with departments to assess a broad scope of retained EU law across all policy areas and the UK statute book.
At present, no conclusions have been made on what pieces of retained EU law will be amended under the proposed Bill.
The review of retained EU law, led by the Cabinet Office, is continuing. Officials are working to deliver the cross Whitehall review and are working closely with departments to assess a broad scope of retained EU law across all policy areas and the UK statute book.
At present, no conclusions have been made on what pieces of retained EU law will be amended under the proposed Bill.
I refer the Rt Hon Member to my response on 7 February 2022 to PQ107502.
The government recently established the Accreditation Check as a new level of National Security Vetting to improve security within the aviation industry. GOV.UK pages were updated to include this but an administrative error saw some information mistakenly removed. This was rectified as soon as the Cabinet Office became aware.
In line with travel policy guidance, one journey took place in relation to an overnight shift worker travelling from Whitehall, having undertaken their staff duties.
But otherwise, no such vehicles were ordered to take staff from Downing Street in this period.
The financial statement covering the accounts of the Security and Intelligence Agencies in the financial year was laid in Parliament on 16 December 2021. The information was published on GOV.UK on 20 December 2021.
Downing Street is a working building, including catering facilities and offices for staff; as is common in workplaces including the House of Commons, refrigerators are provided for general staff use.
One refrigerator was purchased in the financial year for a Downing Street meeting room, and one to replace an existing refrigerator that had reached the end of its working operation.
Notwithstanding, I can confirm that no such public expenditure was accrued in relation to the matters considered in the investigations by the Second Permanent Secretary or connected with associated media reports on this matter.
Since 1 January 2021, the Litigation Group has continued to provide litigation services to the majority of government departments, including Cabinet Office, and executive agencies, as well as many non-departmental public bodies.
The Group’s work encompasses litigation in public and private law and supports public inquiries and Inquests. This has involved, amongst other things, attending in a wide range of courts including Coroners’ Courts, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, the Royal Courts of Justice and the Supreme Court. Our Employment and Commercial Groups similarly provide litigation services to the majority of government departments and have done so in the period in question.
The government is continuing to monitor global supply chain issues. The most recent ONS monthly UK trade in goods statistics can be found here. The ONS is clear that there are a number of factors beyond EU exit that are influencing global trading patterns, including the COVID-19 pandemic and global supply chain disruption. It remains too early to disaggregate the effects that EU exit has had on trade from these other factors.
Through the Port Infrastructure Fund, the Government has provided £200 million in grants to ports to build the infrastructure needed for both customs and biosecurity checks in 2022. We are confident that these projects are sufficiently advanced and operational to ensure the continued flow of trade in the run up to Christmas and beyond.
The Brexit Checker was launched in August 2019 and is designed to help users get personalised information on how Brexit may affect them and their business, and what actions they need to take to adapt to new rules. As of 1 November 2021, there were a total number of 346,770 unique email addresses signed up to receive updates via the Brexit Checker.
To meet changing user needs, which have shifted from general interest in rule changes (served by gov.uk/brexit and the Brexit Checker) to information on specific tasks and topics based on their situation, GDS has also developed Brexit “hub” pages for businesses, individuals, and families. These provide more targeted entry points for users to find relevant information on key business areas affected by Brexit.
The Cabinet Office regularly publishes a list of ministerial responsibilities. The most recent update was published in November 2021 and can be found on GOV.UK.
The Government has not made or contributed to any administrative determinations in the Northern Ireland Joint Committee that would bar New Zealand exporters accessing Northern Ireland’s market’s using the preferential access set out under UK New Zealand specific WTO tariff rate quota commitment.
Any such impact on New Zealand sheep meat and beef product exporters is a direct result of the EU’s unilateral introduction of Regulation 2020/2170 on the application of Union tariff rate quotas (TRQs) and other import quotas, on 16 December 2020. If strictly applied, the Regulation would mean that importers of goods subject to any EU tariff rate quotas or other import quotas directly into Northern Ireland would be unable to access either EU or UK quotas, and would therefore need to pay a tariff.
The UK has underlined to the European Commission that this is a matter requiring urgent consideration as part of addressing issues with the operation of the Protocol, though there has not yet been any resolution found through the Joint Committee. The Government equally has set out its determination to address the issues faced by New Zealand exporters at a meeting of the WTO agriculture committee on 29 March, and we continue to engage with the New Zealand government as discussions proceed.
This is one of the elements of the Protocol we have been clear should be addressed as we seek to find a new balance in how it operates, as set out in our Command Paper published on 21 July (Northern Ireland Protocol: the way forward, CP502).
The GREAT campaign is designed to be used in every country around the world, but to date there are a small number of countries where there has either not been sufficient HMG presence or opportunity to use the campaign. No country is out of scope for its use. The countries that have not yet used the campaign are:
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Belize
Dominica
Faroe Islands
Grenada
Kiribati
Liechtenstein
Maldives
Nauru
Nicaragua
Palestinian Authority
Papua New Guinea
St. Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sierra Leone
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
The GREAT campaign is designed to be used in every country around the world, but to date there are a small number of countries where there has either not been sufficient HMG presence or opportunity to use the campaign. No country is out of scope for its use. The countries that have not yet used the campaign are:
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Belize
Dominica
Faroe Islands
Grenada
Kiribati
Liechtenstein
Maldives
Nauru
Nicaragua
Palestinian Authority
Papua New Guinea
St. Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sierra Leone
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
The official residences which are owned by the Government and currently available to Ministers are:
● Flats above 10 and 11 Downing Street, which are used by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Prime Minister respectively;
● 1 Carlton Gardens, leased from the Crown Estate, is available as the official residence for the Foreign Secretary; and
● Hillsborough Castle and Stormont are available for Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office while on duty in Northern Ireland.
The Chequers, Dorneywood and Chevening estates are available to Ministers for both official and private use. None of these properties are owned by the Government, and are run by trustees.
Admiralty House is part of the Government estate, which includes rooms that could be used as residential accommodation. It is not in Ministerial use.
The GREAT campaign is designed to be used in every country around the world, but to date there are a small number of countries where there has either not been sufficient HMG presence or opportunity to use the campaign. No country is out of scope for its use. The countries that have not yet used the campaign are:
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Belize
Dominica
Faroe Islands
Grenada
Kiribati
Liechtenstein
Maldives
Nauru
Nicaragua
Palestinian Authority
Papua New Guinea
St. Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sierra Leone
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
The GREAT campaign is designed to be used in every country around the world, but to date there are a small number of countries where there has either not been sufficient HMG presence or opportunity to use the campaign. No country is out of scope for its use. The countries that have not yet used the campaign are:
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Belize
Dominica
Faroe Islands
Grenada
Kiribati
Liechtenstein
Maldives
Nauru
Nicaragua
Palestinian Authority
Papua New Guinea
St. Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Sierra Leone
Tonga
Tuvalu
Vanuatu
GREAT campaign activity has taken place in all 11 member countries of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
GREAT is resourced in line with Government trade and investment priorities.
GREAT campaign activity has taken place in all 11 member countries of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
GREAT is resourced in line with Government trade and investment priorities.
GREAT campaign activity has taken place in all 11 member countries of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership.
GREAT is resourced in line with Government trade and investment priorities.
Since the GREAT campaign was first launched in 2012, the campaign has been extended to 145 countries. GREAT campaign activity is supported by a certain level of diplomatic presence in a country. No country is specifically out of scope for the campaign, there are countries where there is not sufficient presence to support campaign activity.
I am responding on behalf of the Prime Minister’s Office. As has been the practice under successive administrations, a small team of officials went ahead to make arrangements for the visit and to discuss plans for the UK-India partnership. These took place in March, when COVID cases were much lower in India. COVID-secure procedures were followed at all times, including tests before, during and after. Although the official visit was subsequently postponed, £1 billion of new UK-India trade and investment was announced on 4 May that is expected to create more than 6,500 jobs.
The Government is taking full advantage of the opportunities outside the EU to boost our economy, reduce burdens on business, and save taxpayers money, while upholding workers’ rights and welfare standards.
As part of the Queen’s Speech the Government outlined a series of bills in the legislative programme that will ensure we make the most of these opportunities.
The Trade and Cooperation Agreement with the EU, which fully delivers on what the British public voted for, gives us the freedom to pursue policies that work for people across the UK to promote levelling up in education, skills, infrastructure and technology, while creating a greener and more outward-looking economy.
The Prime Minister appointed Lord Frost as Minister of State for the Cabinet Office on 1 March 2021. Lord Frost works closely with colleagues across Government, including the Department for International Trade, to maximise the benefits to the United Kingdom, both from the trade deal with the EU, and the UK’s newly independent trade policy. Full details of Lord Frost’s responsibilities are outlined on Gov.uk.
The EU Secretariat, based in the Cabinet Office, has been established to provide direction and coordination of the UK’s relationship with the EU and its member states. This unit integrates officials from Taskforce Europe and the Transition Taskforce.
The Prime Minister appointed Lord Frost as Minister of State for the Cabinet Office on 1 March 2021. Lord Frost works closely with colleagues across Government, including the Department for International Trade, to maximise the benefits to the United Kingdom, both from the trade deal with the EU, and the UK’s newly independent trade policy. Full details of Lord Frost’s responsibilities are outlined on Gov.uk.
The EU Secretariat, based in the Cabinet Office, has been established to provide direction and coordination of the UK’s relationship with the EU and its member states. This unit integrates officials from Taskforce Europe and the Transition Taskforce.
The Prime Minister appointed Lord Frost as Minister of State for the Cabinet Office on 1 March 2021. Lord Frost works closely with colleagues across Government, including the Department for International Trade, to maximise the benefits to the United Kingdom, both from the trade deal with the EU, and the UK’s newly independent trade policy. Full details of Lord Frost’s responsibilities are outlined on Gov.uk.
The EU Secretariat, based in the Cabinet Office, has been established to provide direction and coordination of the UK’s relationship with the EU and its member states. This unit integrates officials from Taskforce Europe and the Transition Taskforce.
The Prime Minister appointed Lord Frost as Minister of State for the Cabinet Office on 1 March 2021. Lord Frost works closely with colleagues across Government, including the Department for International Trade, to maximise the benefits to the United Kingdom, both from the trade deal with the EU, and the UK’s newly independent trade policy. Full details of Lord Frost’s responsibilities are outlined on Gov.uk.
The EU Secretariat, based in the Cabinet Office, has been established to provide direction and coordination of the UK’s relationship with the EU and its member states. This unit integrates officials from Taskforce Europe and the Transition Taskforce.
As the Cabinet Office has now assumed responsibility for the GREAT campaign there will be a review of the funding, objectives and targeting of the GREAT campaign.
The GREAT campaign has been very successful at promoting the UK abroad since 2012 and is formally governed via a Programme Board of ministers from relevant government departments, plus officials from departments which fund the campaign. The Board meets quarterly and agrees to budget the campaign’s priorities, strategic direction, budget allocations and ensures value for money on behalf of the taxpayer.
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.
The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.
The Trade and Cooperation Agreement covers a wide range of areas and is the responsibility of various departments. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations are published on gov.uk.
This is the first free trade agreement the EU has ever reached based on zero tariffs and zero quota. Businesses will be able to continue to trade smoothly, selling to their customers in the EU, and people will be able to continue to buy goods from Europe tariff-free, protecting consumer prices.
The agreement provides for streamlined customs arrangements, including recognising our respective trusted trade schemes, to support the smooth flow of goods at the border and to reduce administrative costs for traders. This deal also enables us to introduce our own modern subsidy system so that we can better support businesses to grow and thrive, in a way that best suits the interests of UK industries.
This is the first free trade agreement the EU has ever reached based on zero tariffs and zero quota. Businesses will be able to continue to trade smoothly, selling to their customers in the EU, and people will be able to continue to buy goods from Europe tariff-free, protecting consumer prices.
The agreement provides for streamlined customs arrangements, including recognising our respective trusted trade schemes, to support the smooth flow of goods at the border and to reduce administrative costs for traders. This deal also enables us to introduce our own modern subsidy system so that we can better support businesses to grow and thrive, in a way that best suits the interests of UK industries.
This is the first free trade agreement the EU has ever reached based on zero tariffs and zero quota. Businesses will be able to continue to trade smoothly, selling to their customers in the EU, and people will be able to continue to buy goods from Europe tariff-free, protecting consumer prices.
The agreement provides for streamlined customs arrangements, including recognising our respective trusted trade schemes, to support the smooth flow of goods at the border and to reduce administrative costs for traders. This deal also enables us to introduce our own modern subsidy system so that we can better support businesses to grow and thrive, in a way that best suits the interests of UK industries.
This is the first free trade agreement the EU has ever reached based on zero tariffs and zero quota. Businesses will be able to continue to trade smoothly, selling to their customers in the EU, and people will be able to continue to buy goods from Europe tariff-free, protecting consumer prices.
The agreement provides for streamlined customs arrangements, including recognising our respective trusted trade schemes, to support the smooth flow of goods at the border and to reduce administrative costs for traders. This deal also enables us to introduce our own modern subsidy system so that we can better support businesses to grow and thrive, in a way that best suits the interests of UK industries.
The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement provides UK companies supplying contracted services to public authorities in the EU with export opportunities. The Agreement will allow UK companies to compete fairly for these contracted services in the EU. Details of the Agreement are available on gov.uk.
The transition period has now ended. As your question acknowledges, the latest guidance for businesses and citizens is available on gov.uk/transition.
This information is supplemented by departmental helplines and forums where businesses can access more detailed and specific guidance.
For questions relating to the Northern Ireland Protocol, specific information is available from the Trader Support Service and the Movement Assistance Scheme.
I refer the hon. Member to the answers given to PQs 119201 and 119202.
The Government is ensuring that businesses and traders are ready for the end of the transition period through an intense programme of communication and engagement, including the national public information campaign launched in July.
I refer the hon. Member to the answers given to PQs 119201 and 119202.
The Government is ensuring that businesses and traders are ready for the end of the transition period through an intense programme of communication and engagement, including the national public information campaign launched in July.
Ministers and officials talk to representatives of the public and private sectors on a regular basis including regarding negotiations with the EU. Details of ministerial meetings with external organisations are published on gov.uk.
10 Downing Street is an integral part of Cabinet Office.
Full details on the Government’s vetting policy can be found via the HMG Personnel Security Controls published in May 2018.
As has been the practice of successive administrations, details of which employees have access to what material are confidential.
10 Downing Street is an integral part of Cabinet Office.
Full details on the Government’s vetting policy can be found via the HMG Personnel Security Controls published in May 2018.
As has been the practice of successive administrations, details of which employees have access to what material are confidential.
10 Downing Street is an integral part of Cabinet Office.
Full details on the Government’s vetting policy can be found via the HMG Personnel Security Controls published in May 2018.
As has been the practice of successive administrations, details of which employees have access to what material are confidential.
10 Downing Street is an integral part of Cabinet Office.
Full details on the Government’s vetting policy can be found via the HMG Personnel Security Controls published in May 2018.
As has been the practice of successive administrations, details of which employees have access to what material are confidential.
10 Downing Street is an integral part of Cabinet Office.
Full details on the Government’s vetting policy can be found via the HMG Personnel Security Controls published in May 2018.
As has been the practice of successive administrations, details of which employees have access to what material are confidential.
Ofgem, as the independent regulator of the GB gas and electricity markets, continues to examine ways to reduce the impact of the recent unprecedented rise in wholesale gas prices on energy consumers.
BEIS published the latest set of departmental spending transparency data (October, November and December 2021) on 22 April.
My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, does not record receipt of reports submitted by external organisations.
My rt. hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy has regular discussions with Ofgem’s CEO on a range of issues relating to the impact of high global gas prices, including wholesale energy markets. Ofgem, as the independent regulator of Great Britain’s gas and electricity markets, continues to examine ways to reduce the impact of the recent unprecedented rise in wholesale gas prices on energy consumers.
Since 1 January 2021, Litigation Group has continued to provide litigation services to the majority of government departments, including Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, and executive agencies, as well as many non-departmental public bodies.
Carbon dioxide is an essential component of our national economy. Carbon dioxide suppliers have agreed to pay CF Fertilisers a price for the carbon dioxide that it produces, which will enable the company to continue operating while global gas prices remain high, and therefore will ensure that UK businesses have access to a sustainable supply of carbon dioxide. The Government continues to monitor market developments and is examining the options for the market to improve resilience in the provision of essential supplies - such as carbon dioxide - in the longer term.
Throughout summer 2021, and during the most recent disruption to the domestic supply of carbon dioxide, the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs has been engaging with industries across the food supply chain, including pigs and poultry processors, as well as food and drinks manufacturers. Through this engagement, we are able to monitor the industry mitigations needed and can collect evidence to inform policy recommendations, as well as deepening our understanding of sectors’ readiness for the winter.
Devolved Administrations have also been consulted to monitor the effects of the disruptions and assess the preparedness of the industry for the winter months.
The Government recognises that as the global economy has rebounded from the pandemic, we have seen pressures placed on supply chains across sectors. We have taken quick and decisive action to ease these pressures where required including establishing a Supply Chain Advisory Group and Industry Taskforce, which provides a link between business and government to identify causes of supply chain issues and pre-empt future issues. Industry attendees are drawn from a range of sectors including the British Retail Consortium. Additionally, the Department engages at both Ministerial and official level on a range of issues affecting the retail sector including the availability of goods.
At present, demand for building materials is outstripping supply due to a complex set of global issues. The sector is collectively working hard to maximise production, but is experiencing difficulties in keeping pace with demand due to issues including: global shipping congestion; delays at ports; lack and increasing price of containers; increasing costs; challenges recruiting into the industry, and; increasing energy prices.
The Government recognises the impact this situation is having on many smaller building firms and is working closely with the Construction Leadership Council (CLC)’s Product Availability Group to stress that the industry must work collaboratively during this challenging period, and to emphasise the importance of good forward-planning, as well as clear communication within the industry.
The Government recognises that as the global economy has rebounded from the pandemic, we have seen pressures placed on supply chains across sectors. We have taken quick and decisive action to ease these pressures where required including establishing a Supply Chain Advisory Group and Industry Taskforce, which provides a link between business and government to identify causes of supply chain issues and pre-empt future issues. Industry attendees are drawn from a range of sectors including the British Retail Consortium. Additionally, the Department engages at both Ministerial and official level on a range of issues affecting the retail sector including the availability of goods.
The causes of goods shortages can arise from a complex variety of reasons including stockpiling by consumers. Products generally remain in good supply. Retailers have highly resilient supply chains, as evidenced throughout the pandemic, and we have established ways of working with industry.
The Government recognises that as the global economy has rebounded from the pandemic, we have seen pressures placed on supply chains across sectors. We have taken quick and decisive action to ease these pressures where required including establishing a Supply Chain Advisory Group and Industry Taskforce, which provides a link between business and government to identify causes of supply chain issues and pre-empt future issues. Industry attendees are drawn from a range of sectors including the British Retail Consortium. Additionally, the Department engages at both Ministerial and official level on a range of issues affecting the retail sector including the availability of goods.
The causes of goods shortages can arise from a complex variety of reasons including stockpiling by consumers. Products generally remain in good supply. Retailers have highly resilient supply chains, as evidenced throughout the pandemic, and we have established ways of working with industry.
The Government remains confident that Great Britain’s energy security will be maintained thanks to the diversity of our supply sources and the existing market mechanism.
The Government works closely with Ofgem, National Grid Gas and other key industry organisations to monitor gas supply and demand. LNG trade flows are determined by commercial agreements between buyers and sellers and price signals. Great Britain has one of the largest LNG import infrastructures in Europe and the GB gas market is one of the most liquid in the world, providing security through diversity of supply. National Grid’s Gas Winter Outlook, which models supply and demand for upcoming winter, notes in its security of supply test that the supply margin is expected to be more than sufficient.
Around 56,000 high-quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, and heat & buildings.
Around 56,000 high-quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, heat & buildings, transport, and natural resources.
Around 56,000 high-quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, heat & buildings, transport, and natural resources.
Around 56,00 high quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, heat and buildings, transport, and natural resources.
Around 56,00 high quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, heat and buildings, transport, and natural resources.
The automotive sector is an important part of the Government’s plans for green growth, levelling up across our country and driving emissions to net zero by 2050.
The Government is committed to growing the 149,000 jobs in the automotive sector across the UK. Accelerating the transition to zero emission vehicles is estimated to support around 40,000 new jobs by 2030.
As part of the Government’s Net Zero Strategy, we are allocating a further £350 million for the Automotive Transformation Fund, as part of our £1 billion commitment to build an internationally competitive electric vehicle supply chain including gigafactories. This is in addition to the £500m of funding announced as part of the 10 Point Plan.
Recent investment announcements by Nissan, Stellantis and Ford will support thousands of highly skilled, green jobs in the UK, and many more across the supply chain.
The automotive sector is an important part of the Government’s plans for green growth, levelling up across our country and driving emissions to net zero by 2050.
The Government is committed to growing the 149,000 jobs in the automotive sector across the UK. Accelerating the transition to zero emission vehicles is estimated to support around 40,000 new jobs by 2030.
As part of the Government’s Net Zero Strategy, we are allocating a further £350 million for the Automotive Transformation Fund, as part of our £1 billion commitment to build an internationally competitive electric vehicle supply chain including gigafactories. This is in addition to the £500m of funding announced as part of the 10 Point Plan.
Recent investment announcements by Nissan, Stellantis and Ford will support thousands of highly skilled, green jobs in the UK, and many more across the supply chain.
Investment by the Government as part of plans to Build Back Greener by making the UK a world leader in wind energy, including support for manufacturing infrastructure, is directly supporting the retention of green jobs in the UK. Smulders Projects UK, Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy and JDR Cables have recently announced major investments in the UK offshore wind sector that will safeguard jobs.
The offshore wind sector currently employs around 7,200 people and supports a similar number of indirect jobs. Government schemes supporting renewables deployment in the UK, such as Contracts for Difference, and Offshore Wind Manufacturing Investment Support Scheme, support investment and employment in the sector. This could support around 30,000 jobs by 2030.
Around 56,00 high quality green jobs have been secured and created across the UK since November 2020.
The policies and proposals announced in the Net Zero Strategy could also support up to 440,000 jobs in 2030 across power, fuel supply and hydrogen, industry, heat and buildings, transport, and natural resources.
Through Government support, electricity generated from offshore wind has increased from less than 1% in 2010 to 13% in 2020.
This has made the UK a world leader in wind energy, including support for manufacturing infrastructure, is directly supporting the creation of green jobs in the UK. Just this year six manufacturers have already announced major investments in the UK offshore wind sector , supported by Government investment schemes, and delivering up to 3,600 jobs by 2030.
In June 2016, the People with Significant Control (PSC) register and regulations were introduced with the aim of delivering greater transparency around the ownership of UK corporate entities. Over 99% of entities have complied with their PSC filing requirements. The register is widely used, has a positive economic effect and contributes to the fight against the abuse of corporate structures.
Between 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2021, 210 criminal proceedings were issued against companies and directors in connection with failure to comply with PSC requirements. 119 directors and 91 companies have been convicted.
In October 2019, BEIS published a statutory post-implementation review of the PSC regulations which stressed the importance of ensuring the reliability of the PSC register information. With that in mind, the Government has made clear that it will legislate when Parliamentary time allows to require identity verification of PSCs a part of a broader programme targeted at further improving corporate transparency.
The UK Government’s Insolvency Service has undertaken enquiries into a UK registered company with linkages to the Beirut port explosion and, where appropriate, has engaged with the Lebanese authorities. Matters surrounding the explosion remain the subject of ongoing investigation in the Lebanon and it would not be appropriate for me to comment further, nor to address specific questions on the matter, pending the outcome of any actions by the authorities there.
The UK Government’s Insolvency Service has undertaken enquiries into a UK registered company with linkages to the Beirut port explosion and, where appropriate, has engaged with the Lebanese authorities. Matters surrounding the explosion remain the subject of ongoing investigation in the Lebanon and it would not be appropriate for me to comment further, nor to address specific questions on the matter, pending the outcome of any actions by the authorities there.
The Insolvency Service reports income from the fees charged on the insolvency cases it handles, in its annual report and accounts. However it does not hold the information to calculate the amount of fees collected in any bankruptcies of leaseholders in a high-rise residential property with defective cladding.
International postage rates are agreed through the Universal Postal Union (UPU), a specialised body of the United Nations. The postal operator that sends an item to another country remunerates the destination postal operator for processing and delivering the item. The costs the receiving postal operator can claim are agreed on a multilateral basis.
In September 2019, the UPU agreed to reform the remuneration rates to reflect the true cost of delivery. Member countries unanimously agreed on a proposal that committed most members to pay the same rates for bulky letters and small packets, effective from January 2020. In addition, countries meeting certain conditions, would be able to self-declare their rates from 1 July 2020. The US is the only country that currently meets these conditions.
In the negotiations on the reforms to the remuneration rates, the UK sought to minimise the impact on our citizens and businesses, ensure the continued flow of trade and maintain the integrity of the international postal system.
International postage rates are agreed through the Universal Postal Union (UPU), a specialised body of the United Nations. The postal operator that sends an item to another country remunerates the destination postal operator for processing and delivering the item. The costs the receiving postal operator can claim are agreed on a multilateral basis.
In September 2019, the UPU agreed to reform the remuneration rates to reflect the true cost of delivery. Member countries unanimously agreed on a proposal that committed most members to pay the same rates for bulky letters and small packets, effective from January 2020. In addition, countries meeting certain conditions, would be able to self-declare their rates from 1 July 2020. The US is the only country that currently meets these conditions.
In the negotiations on the reforms to the remuneration rates, the UK sought to minimise the impact on our citizens and businesses, ensure the continued flow of trade and maintain the integrity of the international postal system.
International postage rates are agreed through the Universal Postal Union (UPU), a specialised body of the United Nations. The postal operator that sends an item to another country remunerates the destination postal operator for processing and delivering the item. The costs the receiving postal operator can claim are agreed on a multilateral basis.
In September 2019, the UPU agreed to reform the remuneration rates to reflect the true cost of delivery. Member countries unanimously agreed on a proposal that committed most members to pay the same rates for bulky letters and small packets, effective from January 2020. In addition, countries meeting certain conditions, would be able to self-declare their rates from 1 July 2020. The US is the only country that currently meets these conditions.
In the negotiations on the reforms to the remuneration rates, the UK sought to minimise the impact on our citizens and businesses, ensure the continued flow of trade and maintain the integrity of the international postal system.
International postage rates are agreed through the Universal Postal Union (UPU), a specialised body of the United Nations. The postal operator that sends an item to another country remunerates the destination postal operator for processing and delivering the item. The costs the receiving postal operator can claim are agreed on a multilateral basis.
In September 2019, the UPU agreed to reform the remuneration rates to reflect the true cost of delivery. Member countries unanimously agreed on a proposal that committed most members to pay the same rates for bulky letters and small packets, effective from January 2020. In addition, countries meeting certain conditions, would be able to self-declare their rates from 1 July 2020. The US is the only country that currently meets these conditions.
In the negotiations on the reforms to the remuneration rates, the UK sought to minimise the impact on our citizens and businesses, ensure the continued flow of trade and maintain the integrity of the international postal system.
Within the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the UK and EU have agreed a framework under which both parties may agree arrangements on the recognition of professional qualifications (such as mutual recognition agreements) covering the UK and all 27 EU Member States. Once an arrangement is adopted under the TCA, UK professionals will be able to use the terms outlined in the arrangement to secure recognition of their professional qualifications, helping them to provide services within EU Member States.
While frameworks like this are conventional practice in free trade agreements, the Government successfully negotiated improvements to the EU’s original mutual recognition of professional qualification proposals. We have streamlined the process by which regulatory and professional authorities make recommendations to the Partnership Council, and we have opened further possibilities for the types of arrangements which can be adopted by the Council. This could result in more arrangements being agreed at a faster pace.
Over the coming years, professionals will be able to take advantage of any profession-specific EU-wide arrangement agreed under the FTA framework. As of 1 January 2021, UK-qualified professionals who wish to supply services in the EU should seek recognition of their qualifications according to the local laws and regulations of individual Member States.
The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement sets out wide-ranging provisions on Technical Barriers to Trade that will support exporters, including a core chapter and five sectoral annexes. These contain specific provisions which support the profitability of exporters.
Throughout negotiations, agreeing a Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) across as many sectors as possible was a priority for the UK. MRAs remain a useful tool, and we will continue to seek them in negotiations with other partners where this would be beneficial.
The Government has already taken additional steps to reduce disruption to business. As set out in our guidance, to allow businesses time to adjust, relevant CE marked goods that meet EU requirements (where these continue to match UK requirements) can continue to be placed on the GB market until 1 January 2022 in most cases.
The UK’s published approach to negotiations aimed to achieve a transparent schedule of reservations based on the UK and EU’s best offer to date with improved commitments in areas of key interest, and the deal reflects this. The UK and EU have agreed provisions on trade in services and investment in line with our respective Free Trade Agreements with Japan, but with some additional benefits for both sides.
The agreement guarantees that UK investors and service suppliers will be able to access the EU’s markets and will not be subject to discriminatory barriers to trade. It includes gold-standard rules on services and investment liberalisation.
The deal requires that member states clearly set out where they intend to restrict this commitment so that UK businesses have absolute clarity about establishment requirements, and these restrictions are set out in the annexes of reservations to the agreement. The agreement as a whole secures continued market access across a broad range of key sectors, including professional and business services, and significantly exceeds what is available under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules.
Many exceptions are already applied within the Single Market, so do not represent new barriers for UK businesses. New requirements could include having to be EU/EEA national or resident to provide a service, and restrictions vary according to each individual Member State and sector. UK businesses providing services to the EU should check the national regulations of the country in which they do business in to understand how best to operate.
The UK-EU Trade & Co-operation Agreement (TCA) contains provisions on the entry and temporary stay of natural persons for business purposes (Mode IV), similar to the EU’s best precedent reached with Canada and Japan, with some improvements.
We have always been clear that Freedom of Movement between the UK and the EU will end after the Transition Period. This means changes, such as visas and work permits, for some of our service exporters; the Government has been helping UK businesses to get ready for this. However, the TCA we negotiated reflects the importance we know businesses place on cross-border mobility.
The Mode IV commitments we secured provide certainty and clarity for those who travel to another country temporarily to do business. These include reciprocal measures for: short-term business visitors; business visitors for establishment purposes; intra-company transferees; and those providing services under contract, whether as an employee or a self-employed professional.
These commitments guarantee market access to key economic sectors, and ease some burdens on business travellers, such as: removing the need for work permits for some short-term trips, and reducing the number of economic needs tests a country could impose to block access to exporters. They also ensure that the UK and EU Member States have transparent visa application processes, clear signposting on rules for business travellers, and a minimum standard for how business travellers and service providers should be treated when working abroad through non-discrimination clauses.
The Departmental Enquiry Service (The Enquiry Unit - 0207 215 5000) is staffed by 1 x Senior Executive Officer, 1 x Executive Officer and 4 x Administrative Officers. The Unit was fully operational on 29th, 30th and 31st December and provided an email service on 1st, 2nd and 3rd January. The Unit has been fully operational from 4th January onwards. The Enquiry Unit is resourced appropriately to handle incoming enquiries to the Department
In addition to the Department’s Enquiry Unit, BEIS also delivers a Business Support Helpline (0800 098 1098) for individuals and businesses to access signposting and guidance. This resource was increased to handle an anticipated higher number of contacts over the period, including queries relating to the end of the Transition Period.
The Business Support Helpline was open every day from Monday 28th December to Saturday 2nd January 2021, closed Sunday 3rd January.
As we take steps to jumpstart our economy and get on the road to recovery from Covid-19, investment from abroad could provide a much-needed boost to companies right across Britain. But we must not be blind to the risks it could pose to businesses that are right at the heart of our battle against the virus and vital for our subsequent recovery.
That is why on 22 June, this Government laid secondary legislation to amend the Enterprise Act 2002, thereby strengthening the Government’s powers to intervene in certain investments made into the UK. The Government can now intervene on public interest grounds in order to maintain the UK’s capability to combat and mitigate the effects of public health emergencies. Further, subject to Parliament’s approval of a draft statutory instrument, the Government will be shortly be able to intervene in smaller mergers in three of the most national security sensitive sectors: artificial intelligence, cryptographic authentication and advanced materials.
The contract opportunity is a re-tender of an existing contract for misinformation and disinformation monitoring and analysis services to support the Counter Disinformation Unit, which brings together capabilities and expertise from across Government to provide a comprehensive picture of the scope, scale, and reach of misinformation and disinformation.
Ministers and officials work closely with a range of partners with different expertise, including social media platforms, academia, civil society organisations, and commercial partners to ensure a whole society approach to tackling the evolving threat of disinformation and misinformation online.
The contract opportunity is a re-tender of an existing contract for misinformation and disinformation monitoring and analysis services to support the Counter Disinformation Unit to provide a comprehensive picture of the scope, scale, and reach of misinformation and disinformation.
The contract has been published in accordance with relevant transparency requirements pursuant to the Public Contracts Regulations (2015) and is currently live. Given the sensitive nature of the contract opportunity relates in part to national security, a statement of requirement is only available upon signing a non-disclosure agreement.
DCMS and our arms-length bodies have a zero-tolerance approach to any incidents of fraud.
We have robust due diligence and grant monitoring processes to ensure that government funding is used for the purposes intended.
Due to the unique circumstances of COVID-19, DCMS agreed to accept a higher tolerance to fraud risk due to the demand for urgent delivery of relief schemes. This was agreed, subject to a number of mitigations including, in particular, investment in our remedial or post-event scrutiny, with Post Event Assurance (PEA) workstreams embedded in COVID-19 relief packages.
DCMS identified immaterial amounts of fraud in 2020-21 (equivalent to 0.03% of its total budget) which is well within the Department's risk tolerance and average tolerance levels for fraud and error across Central Government (0.5 - 5%). The 2020-21 results of our high-risk COVID-19 packages have been shared with the Public Accounts Committee, at the recall session on 4 November 2021. These findings were tested by the National Audit Office as part of their audit of our year-end accounts. The NAO were satisfied and gave an unqualified opinion on our 2020-21 Accounts.
We are currently reviewing our fraud risk appetite and plan to revert to pre-COVID-19 fraud tolerance levels for the financial year 2022-23.
This specific legal analysis relates to ongoing and future policy development and can therefore not be published at this time, but will be made available in due course.
The statement of requirements for this contract relates to ongoing and future policy developments and therefore cannot be published at this moment in time. It will be made available in due course.
A response was issued on 10 January 2022 under the case reference MC2021/20897.
The Ministry of Defence is transferring historic service personnel records to The National Archives over a 6-year period. The majority of military service personnel records transferred to The National Archives to date cover a period before the creation of the Caribbean Regiment in 1944 although collation 11005 does include earlier records of service personnel from the Caribbean who served in the British Army, including between the First and Second World Wars.
The National Archives and the Ministry of Defence are in the first year of a 6-year project to transfer almost 10 million service personnel records to The National Archives. The National Archives has chosen to focus first on the transfer of records that cover Army ‘other ranks’ and overseas regiments. This approach is based on factors including the age-profile and physical presentation of these records. Over 99% of the records that will be transferred during year 1 will go forward for digitisation, licensing and publication.
The British Indian Army was administered by the India Office and its historic records are held by the British Library. Although The National Archives does not hold service records relating to personnel from the British Indian Army, it does hold some records relating to casualties and decorations (TNA Series WO 429, WO 430, WO 432, WO 433).
The National Archives and the Ministry of Defence are in the first year of a 6-year project to transfer almost 10 million service personnel records to The National Archives. Collations of service records that include personnel from the East Africa Force serving in the British Army at the end of the Second World War have not yet been transferred to The National Archives.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
The methodology and data used to develop the analysis is described in the report. It accounts for the variation in compliance costs across different scenarios with respect to the UK's EU adequacy decisions.
As set out in the report, this analysis is open to consultation. We are seeking further information at this stage in order to robustly quantify these impacts, including on trade, as we build a more detailed impact assessment. The Government would welcome responses to the consultation on this topic.
On 10 September, the government launched a consultation on reforms to create a new, ambitious, pro-growth and innovation-friendly data protection regime that underpins the trustworthy use of data for an even better UK data rights regime.
Our proposals offer improvements within the current framework, while maintaining the UK's worldwide reputation for high data protection standards and securing public trust. The reforms presented for consultation deliberately build on the key elements of the current UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), such as its data processing principles, its data rights for citizens, and its mechanisms for supervision and enforcement.
Furthermore, one of the principles guiding the government's approach is that organisations that comply with the UK’s current regime should still be largely compliant with our future regime, except for only a small number of new requirements.
An initial analysis of the expected impacts of these reforms has been published on which the government is also seeking views during the 10-week consultation period.
Data adequacy is about ensuring the high standards of data protection under the UK GDPR are not undermined when personal data is transferred to a third country. UK data adequacy assessments consider the overall effect of a third country’s data protection laws, their implementation, enforcement, and supervision. Our assessments also take into account how data can be transferred from that country to other destinations.
Adequacy does not require identical laws and practices. The UK will be pragmatic in its assessments and will recognise how partners around the world protect data to high standards and share the same values as the UK but do so through different means.
Work is ongoing and while we have announced priorities and make good progress, we cannot prejudge the outcomes of the technical adequacy assessment work.
Data adequacy is about ensuring the high standards of data protection under the UK GDPR are not undermined when personal data is transferred to a third country. UK data adequacy assessments consider the overall effect of a third country’s data protection laws, their implementation, enforcement, and supervision. Our assessments also take into account how data can be transferred from that country to other destinations.
Adequacy does not require identical laws and practices. The UK will be pragmatic in its assessments and will recognise how partners around the world protect data to high standards and share the same values as the UK but do so through different means.
Work is ongoing and while we have announced priorities and make good progress, we cannot prejudge the outcomes of the technical adequacy assessment work.
Data adequacy is about ensuring the high standards of data protection under the UK GDPR are not undermined when personal data is transferred to a third country. UK data adequacy assessments consider the overall effect of a third country’s data protection laws, their implementation, enforcement, and supervision. Our assessments also take into account how data can be transferred from that country to other destinations.
Adequacy does not require identical laws and practices. The UK will be pragmatic in its assessments and will recognise how partners around the world protect data to high standards and share the same values as the UK but do so through different means.
Work is ongoing and while we have announced priorities and make good progress, we cannot prejudge the outcomes of the technical adequacy assessment work.
Data adequacy is about ensuring the high standards of data protection under the UK GDPR are not undermined when personal data is transferred to a third country. UK data adequacy assessments consider the overall effect of a third country’s data protection laws, their implementation, enforcement, and supervision. Our assessments also take into account how data can be transferred from that country to other destinations.
Adequacy does not require identical laws and practices. The UK will be pragmatic in its assessments and will recognise how partners around the world protect data to high standards and share the same values as the UK but do so through different means.
Work is ongoing and while we have announced priorities and make good progress, we cannot prejudge the outcomes of the technical adequacy assessment work.
The UK regained autonomy over its domestic data protection laws on 1st January 2021. Exact alignment to EU law is not a requirement for EU data adequacy. Indeed, the thirteen EU ‘adequate’ countries, from Israel to New Zealand, each have data protection laws that are different to the EU’s.
The UK can reshape its approach to regulation and seize opportunities with its new regulatory freedoms, helping to drive growth, innovation and competition across the country. The first step in delivering on that objective is the consultation that was announced on 26 August, which went live on 10 September.
In doing so, the UK intends to maintain its high standards of data protection and ensure that the UK data regime continues to be based on public trust in the responsible use of data. We will continue to engage with EU counterparts, as appropriate, on these issues.
The UK has preserved the effect of the EU’s adequacy assessment of Japan’s data protection regime on a transitional basis, recognising that Japan offers adequate protection levels for UK citizens’ personal data. This allows personal data to flow freely between the UK and Japan on the basis of strong data protection guarantees.
UK legislation commits the Secretary of State to periodically review decisions taken in respect of the adequacy of other countries, to assess whether they continue to provide an adequate level of personal data protection. Should the Secretary of State consider Japan to no longer provide an adequate level of personal data protection, the Secretary of State could revoke or amend the adequacy decision.
The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Cross-Border Privacy Rules system (APEC CBPR) facilitates personal data flows among nine APEC members. As the UK is not an APEC member it cannot join the CBPR system, but we acknowledge the potential benefits this system provides as a baseline for data protection in the region.
UK GDPR provides for a range of personal data international transfer mechanisms including standard contractual clauses, binding corporate rules, codes of conduct and certification. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is considering the operation of international frameworks, including the APEC CBPR system. This includes an assessment of similarities and differences between these models and the framework set out in UK GDPR and will inform any future assessment on the merits and disadvantages of pursuing interoperability with the CBPR system.
This Government is committed to making the UK the safest place in the world to be online and the best place to start and grow a digital business. We stand by our online harms commitment and nothing agreed in trade deals will affect that. The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement does not impact the government’s ability to enact legislation to tackle online harms.
In December we published the full government response to the Online Harms White Paper, which set out the expectations on companies to keep their users safe online. The Online Safety Bill, which will give effect to the regulatory framework set out in the full government response, will be ready this year.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) does not affect existing data protection standards in the UK or Japan. Further, the UK has preserved on a transitional basis the effect of the EU’s adequacy assessment of Japan’s data protection regime, which recognises that Japan offers an adequate level of data protection. This allows personal data to flow freely between the two economies on the basis of strong data protection guarantees.
The data provisions in CEPA do not affect the scope of the UK GDPR or the Data Protection Act 2018. If a Japanese company is processing employees’ personal data in the context of an establishment in the UK, or otherwise meets the requirements of the territorial scope provisions of the UK GDPR, then the UK GPDR and Data Protection Act 2018 will apply to the processing.
The European Commission published draft adequacy decisions for the UK on 19 February 2021. These decisions follow a thorough assessment of the UK’s legislation and regulatory framework for personal data.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) is compatible with these decisions because CEPA’s provisions do not affect the data protection standards set out in the UK GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018, including those concerning the cross border transfer of personal data.
The UK recognises the importance of data protection to enable trading partners to build trust through transparent treatment of personal data and to ensure that data is able to flow in an uninterrupted manner.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) obliges both parties to adopt or maintain a legal framework that provides for the protection of the personal information of the users of electronic commerce, which includes publishing information on protections as well as ways that individuals can pursue remedies and businesses can comply with legal requirements.
CEPA does not change existing protection for UK citizens’ personal data, as set out in the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, including the right to be informed about the collection and use of their personal data
The most relevant exemption for data protection - in the cross-border transfer of information article (Article 8.84) in the CEPA - allows the UK to adopt measures restricting data flows to achieve a legitimate public policy objective, such as personal data protection, provided the conditions attached to the use of the exemption are satisfied.
UK citizens will enjoy the same protections for their personal data as they did before the agreement. Nothing in the UK-Japan Comprehensive Partnership Agreement (CEPA) changes the current position in relation to onward transfers of UK personal data from Japan. Transfers of personal data from the UK to Japan are governed by the preserved effect of the EU’s adequacy decision for Japan. This recognises that the Japanese data regime has appropriate protections in place when personal data is transferred from Japan to other countries, including enforcement mechanisms.
Transfers of personal data from the UK to third countries are regulated under the UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, not free trade agreements.
The UK-Japan CEPA does not change the current position in relation to onward transfers of UK personal data from Japan. Transfers of personal data from the UK to Japan are governed by the preserved effect of the EU’s adequacy decision for Japan. This recognises that the Japanese data regime provides appropriate protections when personal data is transferred from Japan to third countries.
The UK is preserving the effect of the EU's adequacy decision for Japan on a transitional basis because robust protections are in place for the international transfer of personal data. The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) does not change this position in relation to onward transfers of UK personal data from Japan.
The CEPA article on cross-border flows (8.84.2) states that exceptions to the flow of data can be made to achieve “legitimate public policy objectives”. This means that if justified, either party could take action to restrict data flows.
CEPA addresses data flows between the UK and Japan and not onward transfers to other jurisdictions.
We are confident the UK GDPR is compliant with the terms of the legitimate public policy exception in the cross-border flows article (8.84) of the UK-Japan CEPA. The UK GDPR requirements are not arbitrary nor unjustifiably discriminatory, and ensure a high standard of protection for personal data transferred outside the UK.
The EU-Japan agreement does not include data provisions. There is simply a review clause in the free flow of data article that commits the parties to assess the need for the inclusion of provisions on the free flow of data in the agreement within 3 years.
UK citizens’ data protection rights are not impacted by the agreement with Japan and UK data protection standards will not change as a result of the agreement. The UK data protection regime - enshrined in the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR - will continue to apply.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership includes a provision that ensures UK businesses will not be forced to share their software’s source code, or algorithms expressed in that source code, as a condition of entering the Japanese market. This provides protection for UK company trade secrets and allows companies to retain any competitive advantage that their source code provides.
The agreement does not prohibit all regulatory intervention in respect of new technologies and is designed with future-proofing in mind. The permissible interventions include setting standards, supplier selection, reviewing coding procedures, inspecting underlying data-sets, and prose explanations as to how an algorithm reached a decision.
In designing the exceptions to the source code provision, the UK and Japan have taken a technology and regulator neutral approach. We are convinced that this approach is best to ensure the provision and the exceptions meet both the current and future needs of UK regulators.
(a) The UK has been in formal talks with the European Commission since March 2020 to secure data adequacy decisions under both the General Data Protection Regulation and the Law Enforcement Directive. The EU’s adequacy assessments ascertain whether UK data protection standards are ‘essentially equivalent’ to the EU’s. Given we have an existing data protection framework that is equivalent to the EU’s, we see no reason why the UK should not be awarded adequacy.
(b) The EU left insufficient time to adopt data adequacy decisions before the end of the transition period. We have therefore agreed with the EU a time-limited ‘bridging mechanism’ which will allow personal data to continue to flow as it does now whilst EU adequacy decisions for the UK are adopted. In practice, we do not expect the bridging mechanism to be in place for more than 4 months, which is when the bridge is envisioned to expire, but there is scope to extend it to 6 months if required. As stated above, given the UK has an existing data protection framework that is equivalent to the EU’s, we see no reason why the UK should not be awarded adequacy in this timeframe.
(c) In the event that positive adequacy decisions are not ratified before the end of the bridging mechanism, businesses would be able to use alternative legal mechanisms to continue to transfer personal data from the EU to the UK. Standard Contractual Clauses (SCCs) are the most common legal safeguard and will be the relevant mitigation for most organisations. As a sensible precaution, before and during the bridging mechanism, businesses should consider putting in place alternative transfer mechanisms to safeguard against any interruption to the free flow of EU to UK personal data.
Since 1 January 2021, Litigation Group has continued to provide litigation services to the majority of government departments, including the Department for Education, and executive agencies, as well as many non-departmental public bodies.
The Group’s work encompasses litigation in public and private law as well as supporting public inquiries and acting in inquests. This has involved, amongst other things, attending in a wide range of courts (including Coroners’ Courts), the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, the Royal Courts of Justice and the Supreme Court.
GLD’s Employment and Commercial Groups similarly provide litigation services to the majority of government departments and have done so in the period in question.
The department publishes annual experimental statistics on UK revenue from education related exports and transnational education activity.
The latest release, published in December 2020, estimated total UK revenue from education related exports and transnational activity in 2018 to be £23.3 billion, of which £16 billion (69%) of the total value came from higher education activity.
The statistical release, along with the technical note detailing the methodology and data sources used can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-revenue-from-education-related-exports-and-transnational-education-activity-2018.
Through the government’s International Education Strategy, and the 2021 update to the Strategy, we have committed to providing a clearer picture of Education Exports data. The department continues to work closely with the Department for International Trade on this matter and as set out in the 2021 Update, a roadmap is being developed focusing on short/medium/long-term steps to improve data. The update can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-education-strategy-2021-update/international-education-strategy-2021-update-supporting-recovery-driving-growth.
The department publishes annual experimental statistics on UK revenue from education related exports and transnational education activity.
The latest release, published in December 2020, estimated total UK revenue from education related exports and transnational activity in 2018 to be £23.3 billion, of which £16 billion (69%) of the total value came from higher education activity.
The statistical release, along with the technical note detailing the methodology and data sources used can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-revenue-from-education-related-exports-and-transnational-education-activity-2018.
Through the government’s International Education Strategy, and the 2021 update to the Strategy, we have committed to providing a clearer picture of Education Exports data. The department continues to work closely with the Department for International Trade on this matter and as set out in the 2021 Update, a roadmap is being developed focusing on short/medium/long-term steps to improve data. The update can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/international-education-strategy-2021-update/international-education-strategy-2021-update-supporting-recovery-driving-growth.
The UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement guarantees that UK investors and service suppliers will be able to access the EU’s markets and will not be subject to discriminatory barriers to trade. The agreement includes gold standard rules on services and investment liberalisation.
The Department is engaging with education exporters to help the sector understand and adapt to these new trading conditions, including those within the EdTech sector.
The Invitation to Tender closed on 17 March 2022 and is currently being evaluated by the technical evaluators. We received six bids and the consensus meeting is due to take place on 28 March 2022. As usual, any resulting contract will be redacted/published in Contracts Finder in due course, within the permissible 30 day period.
Since 1 January 2021, Litigation Group has continued to provide litigation services to the majority of Government departments, including Defra, and executive agencies, as well as many non-departmental public bodies.
The Group’s work encompasses litigation in public and private law as well as supporting public inquiries and acting in Inquests. This has involved, amongst other things, attending in a wide range of courts, including Coroners’ Courts, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, the Royal Courts of Justice and the Supreme Court. Our Employment and Commercial Groups similarly provide litigation services to the majority of Government departments and have done so in the period in question.
While no specific provision for the onion sector has been allocated from 2021-22 to 2024-25, sources of funding available to the onion industry between now and 2024-25 could include the three funds available under the Farming Innovation Programme, the forthcoming Farming Investment Fund, and existing Fruit and Vegetable Producer Organisations under the Fruit and Vegetable Aid Scheme.
We are aware that due to the increase in cost of natural gas across the globe, which is a key input for the production of ammonium nitrate-based fertiliser products, the cost of production of these fertiliser types has increased significantly. This has also increased the cost of other alternative fertiliser types. This is an issue affecting Europe and the global market with fertiliser companies halting production due to high input costs. However, the recent deal announced with industry and CF Fertilisers will help to alleviate the pressure on the domestic market.
Defra has been in regular contact with industry including the NFU and fertiliser producers and importers, and we have frequent contact with the key sector representative body for fertilisers, the Agricultural Industries Confederation (AIC). The situation and impact on farmers in particular and industry more widely is being monitored closely.
Alternatives to ammonium nitrate do exist and farmers will be looking closely at these options and how best they can be utilised. Support from producers of these products on how best to use them and to get the best nutrient uptake for crop has been offered.
Full import controls on GB exports to the EU have been in operation by the EU since 1 January 2021. The number of export health certificates being issued will not change as a result of our own implementation of border checks on EU imports into GB.
Estimates of the total number of export health certificates required following the end of the transition period indicated that up to 300k additional certificates would be needed for GB-EU trade, and up to 480k per annum when GB-NI and GB-Rest of World Trade were included. The EU determines how many physical checks it needs to conduct with minimum levels set out in the Official Controls Regulation. Regulated imports and exports are subject to 100% documentary checks.
We estimate, based on our own analysis of customs data, that 4 million to 5.9 million consignments of sanitary and phytosanitary commodities will be imported annually from the EU. These are divided between 1.3 million to 2.5 million consignments of products of animal origin, and 2.7 million to 3.4 million consignments of plants and plant products. Each individual consignment will require certification. A minimum 1% of all low-risk imports will be physically checked with higher percentages for commodities that present a greater biosecurity risk.
The UK has a highly resilient food supply chain, as demonstrated throughout the Covid-19 response. It is well equipped to deal with situations with the potential to cause disruption. Our high degree of food security is built on access to a range of sources, including robust domestic supply chains, as well as imports through stable export routes
Defra has well established ways of working with the industry and across Government to monitor risks that may arise. This includes extensive, regular and ongoing engagement with manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in preparedness for, and response to, issues with the potential to cause disruption across different product groups in food supply chains.
The UK has a highly resilient food supply chain, as demonstrated throughout the Covid-19 response. It is well equipped to deal with situations with the potential to cause disruption. Our high degree of food security is built on access to a range of sources, including robust domestic supply chains, as well as imports through stable export routes
Defra has well established ways of working with the industry and across Government to monitor risks that may arise. This includes extensive, regular and ongoing engagement with manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in preparedness for, and response to, issues with the potential to cause disruption across different product groups in food supply chains.
The UK has a highly resilient food supply chain, as demonstrated throughout the Covid-19 response. It is well equipped to deal with situations with the potential to cause disruption. Our high degree of food security is built on access to a range of sources, including robust domestic supply chains, as well as imports through stable export routes
Defra has well established ways of working with the industry and across Government to monitor risks that may arise. This includes extensive, regular and ongoing engagement with manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in preparedness for, and response to, issues with the potential to cause disruption across different product groups in food supply chains.
The UK has a highly resilient food supply chain, as demonstrated throughout the Covid-19 response. It is well equipped to deal with situations with the potential to cause disruption. Our high degree of food security is built on access to a range of sources, including robust domestic supply chains, as well as imports through stable export routes
Defra has well established ways of working with the industry and across Government to monitor risks that may arise. This includes extensive, regular and ongoing engagement with manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in preparedness for, and response to, issues with the potential to cause disruption across different product groups in food supply chains.
The Government's Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution is mobilising significant investment in protecting the natural environment in England over the coming years. This will create and retain a range of green jobs while safeguarding our cherished landscapes and restoring habitats for wildlife in order to combat biodiversity loss and adapt to climate change.
As part of this, the £80 million Green Recovery Challenge Fund (GRCF) has already attracted £17.6 million in match funding across 159 projects and will create and retain around 2,500 jobs. The Government's £5.2 billion flood defence investment programme will create approximately 2,000 jobs over the duration of the programme (April 2021 - March 2027) with private sector delivery partners involved in flood defence scheme design and construction.
The England Trees Action Plan committed to treble tree planting rates in England by the end of this Parliament, supported by over £500m from the Nature for Climate Fund. In the recently launched Net Zero Strategy, the Government has also announced that it will boost the Nature for Climate fund with a further £124 million of new money, ensuring total spend of more than £750 million by 2025 on peat restoration, woodland creation and management – above and beyond what was promised in the manifesto. This funding, along with increased private investment, will help to support up to 1,900 jobs by 2024 and 2,000 jobs by 2030 in new woodland creation, harvesting and restocking. It will also support additional jobs in tourism, seed supply and local farming.
The England Peat Action Plan includes a commitment to invest over £50 million of the Nature for Climate Fund to restore approximately 35,000ha of peatland by 2025, which will create or retain approximately 600 jobs.
This is a devolved matter and the information provided therefore relates to England only.
The Government's Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution is mobilising significant investment in protecting the natural environment in England over the coming years. This will create and retain a range of green jobs while safeguarding our cherished landscapes and restoring habitats for wildlife in order to combat biodiversity loss and adapt to climate change.
As part of this, the £80 million Green Recovery Challenge Fund (GRCF) has already attracted £17.6 million in match funding across 159 projects and will create and retain around 2,500 jobs. The Government's £5.2 billion flood defence investment programme will create approximately 2,000 jobs over the duration of the programme (April 2021 - March 2027) with private sector delivery partners involved in flood defence scheme design and construction.
The England Trees Action Plan committed to treble tree planting rates in England by the end of this Parliament, supported by over £500m from the Nature for Climate Fund. In the recently launched Net Zero Strategy, the Government has also announced that it will boost the Nature for Climate fund with a further £124 million of new money, ensuring total spend of more than £750 million by 2025 on peat restoration, woodland creation and management – above and beyond what was promised in the manifesto. This funding, along with increased private investment, will help to support up to 1,900 jobs by 2024 and 2,000 jobs by 2030 in new woodland creation, harvesting and restocking. It will also support additional jobs in tourism, seed supply and local farming.
The England Peat Action Plan includes a commitment to invest over £50 million of the Nature for Climate Fund to restore approximately 35,000ha of peatland by 2025, which will create or retain approximately 600 jobs.
This is a devolved matter and the information provided therefore relates to England only.
The EU introduced sanitary and phytosanitary controls on all exports from Great Britain (GB) to the EU on 1 January 2021. Since then, all animal and animal product exports must have an appropriate export health certificate (EHC) and plants and plant products require a phytosanitary certificate (PC).
Each commodity type in a consignment will require a minimum of one EHC but in some cases, mixed load consignments or packages may require multiple EHCs. Physical checks conducted by the EU are not notified to the UK and therefore we are unable to confirm how many exporters have faced checks at EU border control posts. Minimum percentages for specific checks are set out in the Official Controls Regulation for both the EU and the UK to comply with.
Since 1 January, 1,533 GB plant exporters have applied for 28,904 PCs (this figure include plants moving to Northern Ireland).
Likewise, there have been 159,000 EHCs issued for animal and animal products commodities exported to EU member states from approximately 1,300 businesses.
The EU introduced sanitary and phytosanitary controls on all exports from Great Britain (GB) to the EU on 1 January 2021. Since then, all animal and animal product exports must have an appropriate export health certificate (EHC) and plants and plant products require a phytosanitary certificate (PC).
Each commodity type in a consignment will require a minimum of one EHC but in some cases, mixed load consignments or packages may require multiple EHCs. Physical checks conducted by the EU are not notified to the UK and therefore we are unable to confirm how many exporters have faced checks at EU border control posts. Minimum percentages for specific checks are set out in the Official Controls Regulation for both the EU and the UK to comply with.
Since 1 January, 1,533 GB plant exporters have applied for 28,904 PCs (this figure include plants moving to Northern Ireland).
Likewise, there have been 159,000 EHCs issued for animal and animal products commodities exported to EU member states from approximately 1,300 businesses.
The UK is introducing sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) import controls in a phased manner, supporting businesses as they come through the pandemic and ensuring that we do not disrupt food supply. From 1 January 2022, high-priority plants and plant products and live animals will be subjected to full import controls with checks taking place at destination. We will be introducing pre-notification requirements for all other regulated SPS goods from 1 January 2022 and full import controls from July 2022 onwards.
We cannot break down individual business numbers easily. Approximately 1,400 businesses registered for pre-notification and the following checks have been conducted:
73,401 consignments of regulated plants and plant products have been imported to the UK from the EU: 59,210 (80.67%) were subjected to SPS documentary checks of which 48 failed (0.07%).
49,822 were subject to identity checks (67.88%) of which 12 failed (0.02%).
11,310 faced physical SPS checks (15.41%) and 22 failed such checks (0.03%).
9796 consignments of live animals were imported into the UK from the EU. All were subject to documentary checks and 2122 (22%) were subjected to physical inspection.
The UK is introducing sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) import controls in a phased manner, supporting businesses as they come through the pandemic and ensuring that we do not disrupt food supply. From 1 January 2022, high-priority plants and plant products and live animals will be subjected to full import controls with checks taking place at destination. We will be introducing pre-notification requirements for all other regulated SPS goods from 1 January 2022 and full import controls from July 2022 onwards.
We cannot break down individual business numbers easily. Approximately 1,400 businesses registered for pre-notification and the following checks have been conducted:
73,401 consignments of regulated plants and plant products have been imported to the UK from the EU: 59,210 (80.67%) were subjected to SPS documentary checks of which 48 failed (0.07%).
49,822 were subject to identity checks (67.88%) of which 12 failed (0.02%).
11,310 faced physical SPS checks (15.41%) and 22 failed such checks (0.03%).
9796 consignments of live animals were imported into the UK from the EU. All were subject to documentary checks and 2122 (22%) were subjected to physical inspection.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
UK legislation sets out high standards for animal welfare. This includes the 2006 Animal Welfare Act, the 2007 Welfare of Farmed Animal Regulations, the 2007 Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) Regulations, and the 2015 Welfare at the Time of Killing regulations, as well as the retained EU Regulation 1/2005 on the protection of animals during transport. Animal welfare is a fully devolved matter and comparable legislation exists in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
The Government launched a call for evidence on 13 September to assess the impacts of different types of labelling reforms for animal welfare. For the purpose of this call for evidence, 'imports of lower welfare' is defined as 'the subset of imports that do not meet baseline UK welfare regulations', including, but not limited to, the regulations mentioned above.
Any future label requirements would need to be underpinned by a set of agreed welfare standards, referring to how these meet, exceed, or fall below baseline UK welfare regulations and international standards. The development of such welfare standards would be informed by the responses to this call for evidence and further stakeholder engagement.
The responses to this call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling. This will feed into the Government’s wider work on food labelling to ensure that consumers can have confidence in the food they buy and to facilitate the trade of quality British food at home and abroad.
The World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) has recently concluded that there is insufficient evidence to consider raw mink fur skins as safe for international trade because of the SARS-CoV-2 risk. Further evidence is needed to improve our understanding of any other risks to human or animal health potentially posed by international trade in contaminated pelts or fur. The UK has been closely involved in these discussions.
The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) has established that no specific authorisations have been issued for the import of untreated furs from third countries into the UK in the last two years. This view is supported by analysis of data from the Import of Products, Animals, Food and Feed System (IPAFFS), which is used to notify enforcement authorities about imports of live animals, animal products and high-risk food and feed not of animal origin into Great Britain. No Export Health Certificates have been issued by the domestic authorities for raw mink skins and APHA data also show no evidence of any UK export of this commodity.
The UK's approach to biosecurity is internationally recognised for delivering the highest standards of protection from pests, diseases, and invasive non-native species. This begins with the vital process of horizon scanning to detect potential risks, it includes robust measures to prevent and detect incursions as well as a capacity to respond effectively to contain or eradicate outbreaks that may occur. This is underpinned by world-class scientific capabilities and collaboration internationally and across Government through key links with industry, stakeholder organisations and the wider public.
Safeguard measures under the OIE code may be put in place to ban the import of goods because of a new or emerging disease threat. Although such measures have not been introduced domestically to date, we continue to monitor developments and to consider our response should we receive any applications to import raw mink fur.
The World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) has recently concluded that there is insufficient evidence to consider raw mink fur skins as safe for international trade because of the SARS-CoV-2 risk. Further evidence is needed to improve our understanding of any other risks to human or animal health potentially posed by international trade in contaminated pelts or fur. The UK has been closely involved in these discussions.
The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) has established that no specific authorisations have been issued for the import of untreated furs from third countries into the UK in the last two years. This view is supported by analysis of data from the Import of Products, Animals, Food and Feed System (IPAFFS), which is used to notify enforcement authorities about imports of live animals, animal products and high-risk food and feed not of animal origin into Great Britain. No Export Health Certificates have been issued by the domestic authorities for raw mink skins and APHA data also show no evidence of any UK export of this commodity.
The UK's approach to biosecurity is internationally recognised for delivering the highest standards of protection from pests, diseases, and invasive non-native species. This begins with the vital process of horizon scanning to detect potential risks, it includes robust measures to prevent and detect incursions as well as a capacity to respond effectively to contain or eradicate outbreaks that may occur. This is underpinned by world-class scientific capabilities and collaboration internationally and across Government through key links with industry, stakeholder organisations and the wider public.
Safeguard measures under the OIE code may be put in place to ban the import of goods because of a new or emerging disease threat. Although such measures have not been introduced domestically to date, we continue to monitor developments and to consider our response should we receive any applications to import raw mink fur.
The World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) has recently concluded that there is insufficient evidence to consider raw mink fur skins as safe for international trade because of the SARS-CoV-2 risk. Further evidence is needed to improve our understanding of any other risks to human or animal health potentially posed by international trade in contaminated pelts or fur. The UK has been closely involved in these discussions.
The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) has established that no specific authorisations have been issued for the import of untreated furs from third countries into the UK in the last two years. This view is supported by analysis of data from the Import of Products, Animals, Food and Feed System (IPAFFS), which is used to notify enforcement authorities about imports of live animals, animal products and high-risk food and feed not of animal origin into Great Britain. No Export Health Certificates have been issued by the domestic authorities for raw mink skins and APHA data also show no evidence of any UK export of this commodity.
The UK's approach to biosecurity is internationally recognised for delivering the highest standards of protection from pests, diseases, and invasive non-native species. This begins with the vital process of horizon scanning to detect potential risks, it includes robust measures to prevent and detect incursions as well as a capacity to respond effectively to contain or eradicate outbreaks that may occur. This is underpinned by world-class scientific capabilities and collaboration internationally and across Government through key links with industry, stakeholder organisations and the wider public.
Safeguard measures under the OIE code may be put in place to ban the import of goods because of a new or emerging disease threat. Although such measures have not been introduced domestically to date, we continue to monitor developments and to consider our response should we receive any applications to import raw mink fur.
The World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) has recently concluded that there is insufficient evidence to consider raw mink fur skins as safe for international trade because of the SARS-CoV-2 risk. Further evidence is needed to improve our understanding of any other risks to human or animal health potentially posed by international trade in contaminated pelts or fur. The UK has been closely involved in these discussions.
The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) has established that no specific authorisations have been issued for the import of untreated furs from third countries into the UK in the last two years. This view is supported by analysis of data from the Import of Products, Animals, Food and Feed System (IPAFFS), which is used to notify enforcement authorities about imports of live animals, animal products and high-risk food and feed not of animal origin into Great Britain. No Export Health Certificates have been issued by the domestic authorities for raw mink skins and APHA data also show no evidence of any UK export of this commodity.
The UK's approach to biosecurity is internationally recognised for delivering the highest standards of protection from pests, diseases, and invasive non-native species. This begins with the vital process of horizon scanning to detect potential risks, it includes robust measures to prevent and detect incursions as well as a capacity to respond effectively to contain or eradicate outbreaks that may occur. This is underpinned by world-class scientific capabilities and collaboration internationally and across Government through key links with industry, stakeholder organisations and the wider public.
Safeguard measures under the OIE code may be put in place to ban the import of goods because of a new or emerging disease threat. Although such measures have not been introduced domestically to date, we continue to monitor developments and to consider our response should we receive any applications to import raw mink fur.
Following the contract award on 2 December 2020, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) provided the geographical indications technical documents to Acuity translations with a view to work commencing on 23 December 2020. Defra received all the completed translations of the geographical indication technical documents on 1 February 2021 and provided the Department for International Trade with these documents on 13 April 2021 as requested following discussion with Japanese counterparts.
Following the contract award on 2 December 2020, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) provided the geographical indications technical documents to Acuity translations with a view to work commencing on 23 December 2020. Defra received all the completed translations of the geographical indication technical documents on 1 February 2021 and provided the Department for International Trade with these documents on 13 April 2021 as requested following discussion with Japanese counterparts.
Following the contract award on 2 December 2020, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) provided the geographical indications technical documents to Acuity translations with a view to work commencing on 23 December 2020. Defra received all the completed translations of the geographical indication technical documents on 1 February 2021 and provided the Department for International Trade with these documents on 13 April 2021 as requested following discussion with Japanese counterparts.
HMRC data for 2019 indicates approximate values of £52,911,000 gross imports, £32,713,000 gross exports, and £20,198,000 net imports. This covers raw furskins, tanned or dressed furskins, and articles of apparel, clothing accessories and other furskin articles.
|
| 2019 | |
4301 Raw furskins | Imports | Value (£) | £962,216 |
4301 Raw furskins | Exports | Value (£) | £536,654 |
4301 Raw furskins | Net Imports | Value (£) | £425,562 |
|
|
|
|
4302 Tanned or dressed furskins | Imports | Value (£) | £7,773,470 |
4302 Tanned or dressed furskins | Exports | Value (£) | £7,012,555 |
4302 Tanned or dressed furskins | Net Imports | Value (£) | £760,915 |
|
|
|
|
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accessories and other furskin articles | Imports | Value (£) | £44,174,922 |
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accessories and other furskin articles | Exports | Value (£) | £25,163,877 |
4303 Articles of apparel, clothing accessories and other furskin articles | Net Imports | Value (£) | £19,011,045 |
|
|
|
|
TOTALS | Imports | Value (£) | £52,910,608 |
TOTALS | Exports | Value (£) | £32,713,086 |
TOTALS | Net Imports | Value (£) | £20,197,522 |
Sourced from https://www.uktradeinfo.com/trade-data/ots-custom-table/ |
The UK has secured its top priorities on sanitary and phytosanitary measures: autonomy for our domestic regime, protection of our biosecurity and proportionate risk-based controls. The agreement allows the UK and the EU to cooperate on avoiding unnecessary sanitary and phytosanitary barriers to trade in agri-food goods, including potential reductions in the frequency of import checks, where justified.
The EU and UK being geographically close, and close as trading partners, have a number of common pathogen risks, a similar health status and biosecurity aims. We should focus resources on checks that support us both to address any risks. We will seek to reduce checks safely through the regular dialogue both sides have committed to in the agreement. Over time, this will help to reduce any burden on businesses. Taken alongside other elements of the TCA such as zero tariffs and zero quota, this represents a good outcome for the UK's agri-food industry. We have also agreed to exchange information and expertise on animal welfare, particularly relating to transportation and slaughter of food-producing animals, and other issues.
In the event of a Free Trade Agreement with the EU, as with all Free Trade Agreements and all products, the Rules of Origin for finished tobacco products would be specific to that agreement. The exact rules will be discussed and decided through the negotiations, which, in this case, are still ongoing. The UK and EU have held substantial discussions on Rules of Origin and Defra has supported these conversations.
Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) wrote to Defra on 19 December 2019 to confirm that Japan would continue to recognise UK organic products imported into Japan from the point at which the UK withdrew from the European Union. This recognition is effective for two years until 31 January 2022.
We have already confirmed that we will continue to recognise Japan’s organic products as we do now. We plan to write to MAFF shortly to confirm the legislation that will be in place in the UK at the end of the transition period and to confirm the import processes that they will need to follow to continue to export organic products to the UK.
Japan has also requested to audit the UK organic system in 2021. Defra have suggested some dates and we will continue to engage with MAFF over the coming months.
Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) wrote to Defra on 19 December 2019 to confirm that Japan would continue to recognise UK organic products imported into Japan from the point at which the UK withdrew from the European Union. This recognition is effective for two years until 31 January 2022.
We have already confirmed that we will continue to recognise Japan’s organic products as we do now. We plan to write to MAFF shortly to confirm the legislation that will be in place in the UK at the end of the transition period and to confirm the import processes that they will need to follow to continue to export organic products to the UK.
Japan has also requested to audit the UK organic system in 2021. Defra have suggested some dates and we will continue to engage with MAFF over the coming months.
I refer the hon Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Totnes on 30 June 2020, PQ UIN 62631.
I refer the hon Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Totnes on 30 June 2020, PQ UIN 62631.
The UK plays a leading role in driving the global response to eradicate illegal wildlife trade and regularly holds discussions with its international counterparts.
In 2018, the UK convened the largest ever global Illegal Wildlife Trade conference at which 65 countries signed up to the London Declaration, committing to take urgent, coordinated action against illegal wildlife trade.
Since then, the UK has raised the importance of tackling illegal wildlife trade to protect biodiversity and endangered species with other countries during regular bilaterals and during meetings under international agreements such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).
The UK Government is at the forefront of international efforts to protect endangered wildlife from poaching and illegal trade. We are investing over £36 million between 2014 and 2021 to support practical action in developing countries, including our counter-poaching Task Force in Africa, 75 projects so far funded from our Illegal Wildlife Trade Challenge Fund, and through the International Consortium on Combatting Wildlife Crime. We are also contributing £250 million to the Global Environment Facility between 2018 and 2022 which, amongst other things, supports the world’s biggest fund for tackling illegal wildlife trade, the Global Wildlife Programme.
A further £30 million will be invested in tackling poaching and wildlife crime between 2021 and 2024 as part of the £220 million International Biodiversity Fund recently announced by the Prime Minister.
On 27 June, the PM told Global Citizen’s international summit that world leaders have a moral duty to ensure that vaccines, treatments and tests are truly available to all. We are working with international partners, including industry, to agree collaborative approaches to supporting vaccine development, manufacturing scale-up and future distribution to meet both domestic and international needs.
The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), to which we have provided £250 million this year, is committed to ensuring that appropriate vaccines are available to populations when and where they are needed, regardless of a country's ability to pay. CEPI selects vaccines for its portfolio based on their potential for success, rapid development and scalability. CEPI negotiates global access requirements as part of its funding agreements.
Through the COVAX partnership, under the Access to Covid Tools (ACT)-Accelerator, CEPI, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the World Health Organization are working together to ensure that the vaccines are affordable and available equitably. As part of this, Gavi’s Advance Market Commitment (AMC) will incentivise vaccine manufacturers to produce sufficient quantities of eventual COVID-19 vaccines and to ensure access for LMICs. The UK has contributed £48 million to the AMC.
Whilst DFID has not carried out an assessment on a relationship between malaria and Amazonian deforestation, we are at the forefront of international efforts on both issues. On malaria we are the second largest country donor, including our announcement in June 2019 to contribute up to £1.4 billion to the Sixth Replenishment of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, and this Government has committed to lead efforts towards ending the malaria epidemic. DFID also tackles illegal logging and promotes the sustainable trade in timber, working with companies to eliminate deforestation from supply chains.
The UK continues to make representations regarding Development Assistance Committee criteria for Official Development Assistance (ODA).
The ODA rules enable a broad range of activities to be defined as ODA. They need to continue to evolve as development challenges change and to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals.
Since 2012 the UK has led the way in modernising the rules, securing reforms. We continue to keep scope for improvements under review and actively push for reforms when we consider the rules are out of date.
DFID and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office are closely monitoring the Taal volcano eruption. The Philippine Government is evacuating affected areas and has not requested assistance. The UK Government continues to liaise closely with the Philippine authorities and stands ready to assist should a request be made.
The UK is a longstanding donor to the health sector in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, improving health services, including capacity to tackle disease outbreaks. The UK remains deeply concerned by the ongoing Measles outbreak. We are providing support to the Democratic Republic of the Congo government response through United Nations agencies and Global Alliance for Vaccines (GAVI).
The UK has ensured a £3.2 million emergency allocation from the UN Humanitarian Fund, mostly going to the World Health Organisation for measles vaccinations and treatment. DFID is the largest contributor to the Humanitarian Fund. As a key core funder of GAVI, the UK is also supporting ongoing immunisation work nationwide, including for measles.
We are continuing to follow progress with the response together with partners, keeping resource requirements to end the outbreak under review.
The declaration will be updated in the next 30 days.
The declaration will be updated in the next 30 days.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
There was a typo in my answer of 6 April. The correct cost of the flight was £5,575.72. The department’s transparency return published in January 2020 included flight costs only.
Transparency returns include the best information available to the department at the time of publication. On some visits, accommodation, transport and other services are provided by Embassies or host governments. Information on the costs of these services is not centrally held.
Payments made under the contract for the Provision of Export Support Services Contact Centre have been made on an available hour basis for the period 01 October 2021 to 31 March 2022.
During Quarter 4 (October to December) 2021, 28% of users responded to the Helpline’s Customer Satisfaction survey. Of these, 88% said they were satisfied with the professionalism of the call handler, and 79% said they were satisfied with the overall service. During Quarter 1 (January to March) 2022, 30% of users responded to the survey. Of these, 90% said they were satisfied with the professionalism of the call handler, and 82% said they were satisfied with the overall service.
In October, 5% of customers were referred to the digital enquiry team, 24% in November, 39% in December, 32% in January, 51% in February and 61% in March. This increase reflects a change in the operating model and, for February and March, is because the majority of Russia and Ukraine enquiries were referred on.
The proportion of calls, received by the Export Support Service helpline during operating hours, which were answered within 30 seconds from 1 October 2021 to 31 March 2022 was 93%.
Between 22 February and 31 March 2022 there were 1,660 calls relating to imports and exports affected by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions imposed on Russia and Belarus.
From 1 October 2021 to 31 March 2022 the contact centre received 4 complaints all received in March 2022. These were resolved within 5 working days.
Between 1 October 2021 and 31 March, the Export Support Service Helpline received 4,845 calls. (October 606, November 636, December 456, January 612, February 589, March 1,946). 98% of these were received in the Helpline’s core operating hours.
The ESS helpline was launched 1 October to support business – availability, quality, speed and cost of service all matter. Calls are answered quickly; 93% within 30 seconds, 59% of enquiries are dealt with in a single call, and users report an 89% satisfaction rate. The Department has optimised the service since launch; reducing costs by 18% and adding new services. The utilisation rate fluctuates by the hour. Average weekly rates range from 18%, peaking at 57% in March 2022. Average monthly rates since launch are 8% (October), 6% (November), 6% (December), 8% (January), 7% (February), and 32% (March). Having very high utilisation rates (for example, above 85%) will almost certainly impact service quality with longer waiting time and reduced satisfaction rates.
The Department has begun preparing for implementation of the Australia and New Zealand Free Trade Agreements. This is a cross-government effort, with teams considering pre-entry into force legislative and domestic preparations, and implementation post entry into force.
DIT has allocated £46.3m in 2022-23, £48.3m in 2023-24 and £48.5m in 2024-25 for the negotiation and implementation of free trade agreements, however, it is not possible to identify funding solely for the implementation of the UKs trade agreements with Australia and New Zealand. The Department has no allocated funding for 2025-26.
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £4,363.86. This comprised a return business class ticket from London to Delhi.
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £6,677.12. This comprised a return business class ticket from London to Abu Dhabi, returning Riyadh to London (£6,490.12), plus an economy ticket for a short haul flight from Dubai to Riyadh (£187.00).
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £1,909.22. This comprised a return business class ticket from London to Tel Aviv.
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £5,066.02. This comprised a return business class flight from London to Washington.
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £5,572.72. This comprised a return business class flight from London to New York.
The standalone cost of tickets was £13,614.22. This comprised several flights. Long haul flights (London to New Zealand; Australia to Japan; and Japan to London) were booked at business class. Short haul flights (between Australia and New Zealand, and within Australia) were booked at economy class.
The stand-alone cost of tickets was £2,733.75. This comprised a business class return flight from London to Washington.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) is keeping the current situation under close review.
UKEF follows rigorous recovery processes, but is not able to disclose further detail as doing so may compromise our commercial position. UKEF has recovered the cost of every claim against it since 1991 on a portfolio basis and has returned just over £2 billion to the Treasury.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) is closely monitoring the impact of the current situation on transactions that it has supported in the Russian Federation.
UKEF follows robust due diligence processes before providing support for any transaction, including appropriate assessment of attendant risks. UKEF charges a risk-based premium to companies for its support, and has a robust recovery process in place to protect the taxpayer and offset potential losses.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) does not release details of outstanding exposure on individual transactions for reasons of commercial sensitivity. UKEF follows robust due diligence processes before providing support for any transaction.
The Department for International Trade (DIT) has data for foreign direct investments (FDI) that originated in Russia with DIT support for the financial years 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 - see attached.
Prior to this, DIT has not published data relating specifically to Russia in its breakdown of origin.
UK Export Finance’s remaining exposure from the underwriting of credit for buyers located in the Russian Federation between 2014-15 and 2020-21 as at 31 January 2022 (the latest date for which complete figures are available) was £49,970,667.
As of 31 March 2021, the Department for International Trade (DIT) had a total of 16 staff based in the Russian Federation.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) has not approved any financial institutions in the Russian Federation to provide credit underwritten by UKEF.
During the current financial year to date up to 28 February 2022 (the latest date for which complete figures are currently available), UK Export Finance provided short term trade finance support to three UK companies in support of exports to three buyers in the Russian Federation. The total current exposure for these transactions is £145,000.
UK Export Finance’s remaining exposure for support to exporters who were exporting to the Russian Federation between 2014-15 and 2020-21 as at 28 February 2022 (the latest date for which complete figures are available) are as shown in the table below.
Underwriting of contract bonds | Provision of insurance | Underwriting of working capital |
£809,075 | £0 | £0 |
UK Export Finance’s remaining exposure for support to exporters who were exporting to the Russian Federation between 2014-15 and 2020-21 as at 28 February 2022 (the latest date for which complete figures are available) are as shown in the table below.
Underwriting of contract bonds | Provision of insurance | Underwriting of working capital |
£809,075 | £0 | £0 |
UK Export Finance’s remaining exposure for support to exporters who were exporting to the Russian Federation between 2014-15 and 2020-21 as at 28 February 2022 (the latest date for which complete figures are available) are as shown in the table below.
Underwriting of contract bonds | Provision of insurance | Underwriting of working capital |
£809,075 | £0 | £0 |
The Department does not publish this level of information. Only the overall annual value of export wins is published. Taking more granular cuts of the data increases its risk of being disclosive.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) is currently reviewing all of its cover provisions to support exporters engaged in exporting to the Russian Federation. Under UKEF’s current care on location stipulations for the Russian Federation, in place since at least June 2020, no support is given for transactions in disputed territories.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) does not release details of outstanding exposure on individual transactions for reasons of commercial sensitivity.
All flights and costs for travel are published in transparency returns on a quarterly basis.
My Rt. Hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Trade has never used the VIP suites at Heathrow Airport. Her predecessor also did not use them during her time as Secretary of State for International Trade.
Questions 80249, 80250, 80251, 80252 and 80253 were answered by my Rt Hon Friend, the Member for Portsmouth North, on 8th December.
Since 1st January 2021, the Litigation Group has continued to provide services to the majority of government departments, including the Department for International Trade and ‘UK Export Finance’, executive agencies, and many non-departmental public bodies.
The Group’s work encompasses litigation in public and private law as well as supporting public inquiries and acting in Inquests. This has involved, amongst other work, attending in a wide range of courts, including the Coroners’ Courts, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, the Royal Courts of Justice and the Supreme Court. Their Employment and Commercial Groups similarly provide litigation services to the majority of government departments and have done so in the period in question.
Barriers reported refers to the number of cases identified as being registered on the Digital Market Access Service (DMAS) over a given time period, based on the data at the point of extraction. DMAS is an operational database used by government officials to assist in the removal of market access barriers.
As such, entries on DMAS are subject to ongoing revision to reflect activity and regular system administration updates are made to make sure the database is kept accurate. This can involve archiving cases established to be duplicates or identified not to be market access barriers after further investigation. This means that an extract taken from the live database on different occasions covering the same time period can return different figures.
Figures published in the Department for International Trade (DIT) Annual Report and Accounts (ARA) 2019-20 on the number of market access resolved barriers in that financial year were based on the number of barriers reported and resolved within the year. For the DIT ARA 2020-21, this measure was changed to include barriers resolved regardless of when they were reported.
This makes sure the full range of resolution activity is measured, rather than only barrier resolutions soon after identification and reflects that, for some barriers, resolution will take longer because of the complexities involved.
Barriers reported refers to the number of cases identified as being registered on the Digital Market Access Service (DMAS) over a given time period, based on the data at the point of extraction. DMAS is an operational database used by government officials to assist in the removal of market access barriers.
As such, entries on DMAS are subject to ongoing revision to reflect activity and regular system administration updates are made to make sure the database is kept accurate. This can involve archiving cases established to be duplicates or identified not to be market access barriers after further investigation. This means that an extract taken from the live database on different occasions covering the same time period can return different figures.
Figures published in the Department for International Trade (DIT) Annual Report and Accounts (ARA) 2019-20 on the number of market access resolved barriers in that financial year were based on the number of barriers reported and resolved within the year. For the DIT ARA 2020-21, this measure was changed to include barriers resolved regardless of when they were reported.
This makes sure the full range of resolution activity is measured, rather than only barrier resolutions soon after identification and reflects that, for some barriers, resolution will take longer because of the complexities involved.
133 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2020-21 were reported to the Digital Market Access Service (DMAS) during the year. 84 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
161 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2019-20 were reported to DMAS during the year. 20 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
133 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2020-21 were reported to the Digital Market Access Service (DMAS) during the year. 84 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
161 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2019-20 were reported to DMAS during the year. 20 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
133 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2020-21 were reported to the Digital Market Access Service (DMAS) during the year. 84 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
161 of the barriers fully or partially resolved in the financial year 2019-20 were reported to DMAS during the year. 20 of the market access barriers marked as fully or partially resolved in the year were reported to DMAS in a previous year.
We are pleased that US Department of Agriculture is looking to remove the import restrictions for ‘sheepmeat’. This will be a major milestone in the process of restoring access to the American market. It will be followed by further steps, including agreeing specific SPS and certifications conditions and requirements with Food Safety Inspection Service in the US; and domestic preparations, such as audits of British production establishments. We look forward to supporting the resumption of exports once this is finalised.
The United Kingdom-Switzerland Joint Trade Committee updated the Rules of Origin protocol through a Joint Committee Decision on 16th July 2021. The changes have been provisionally applied since 1st September 2021, whilst the United Kingdom and Switzerland undergo parliamentary procedures to bring the amendment into force.
The changes reflect the revision of the rules between Switzerland and the EU as part of the updates to the Regional Convention on Pan-Euro-Mediterranean (PEM) Preferential Rules of Origin that Switzerland are subject to. They provide modernised rules of origin provisions, including removing the duty drawback prohibition on all products other than textiles, as is the case in the revised PEM rules of origin.
The United Kingdom-Switzerland Joint Trade Committee updated the Rules of Origin protocol through a Joint Committee Decision on 16th July 2021. The changes have been provisionally applied since 1st September 2021, whilst the United Kingdom and Switzerland undergo parliamentary procedures to bring the amendment into force.
The changes reflect the revision of the rules between Switzerland and the EU as part of the updates to the Regional Convention on Pan-Euro-Mediterranean (PEM) Preferential Rules of Origin that Switzerland are subject to. They provide modernised rules of origin provisions, including removing the duty drawback prohibition on all products other than textiles, as is the case in the revised PEM rules of origin.
My department publishes statistics about trade barriers in its annual reports and has recently released further statistics showing that we resolved 217 trade barriers across 74 countries in 2020-21, up 20% from 2019-20. Statistics for April 2021 onwards will be released in the 2021-22 Annual Report.
These barriers include regulatory, legislative and administrative measures imposed by other countries that restrict the flow of goods and services. In addition, we set up a new helpline and online service in October – the Export Support Service – where businesses can access advice and support when exporting to Europe.
My department publishes statistics about trade barriers in its annual reports and has recently released further statistics showing that we resolved 217 trade barriers across 74 countries in 2020-21, up 20% from 2019-20. Statistics for April 2021 onwards will be released in the 2021-22 Annual Report.
These barriers include regulatory, legislative and administrative measures imposed by other countries that restrict the flow of goods and services. In addition, we set up a new helpline and online service in October – the Export Support Service – where businesses can access advice and support when exporting to Europe.
Each assessment references the sources used.
Each assessment references the sources used.
Each assessment references the sources used.
Each assessment references the sources used.
Each assessment references the sources used.
In certain cases, businesses will need to choose between the duty drawback or the preferential rates. This is the case for UK-Mexico Trade Continuity Agreement.
The UK has plans to renegotiate its agreement with Mexico and will carefully assess its position on such restrictions.
In certain cases, businesses will need to choose between the duty drawback or the preferential rates. This is the case for UK-Israel Trade and Partnership Agreement.
The UK-Israel relationship is already strong and growing and we are planning to start work on upgrading our trade agreement next year.
In certain cases, businesses will need to choose between the duty drawback or the preferential rates.
However, in the case of the UK-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, traders would not be affected by this in practice because Singapore applies a zero Most Favoured Nation (MFN) rate to most tariff lines.
In certain cases, businesses will need to choose between the duty drawback or the preferential rates. This is the case for the UK-Canada Trade Continuity Agreement.
The UK has plans to renegotiate its agreement with Canada and will carefully assess its position on such restrictions.
There are currently prohibitions to duty drawback in the UK-Switzerland free trade agreement. Such restrictions can mean that exporters may not be able to make use of certain freeport advantages while also using the Free Trade Agreements for their exports.
The UK and Switzerland have just updated their rules of origin provisions, meaning that duty drawback restrictions now apply only to a limited number of products in the textile and apparel sector.
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 18 November to Question UIN: 74914.
There is a clear positive relationship between the size of the middle class overseas and demand for exports from the UK’s sectors of comparative advantage (as set out on pages 32 and 34 of the Department for International Trade’s Global Trade Outlook published in September 2021). Among the UK’s sectors of specialism, demand for: life sciences; financial services; business services; intellectual property, recreation and media; travel services; aerospace and other transport; construction; and digital services are all projected to grow faster than the global average in the years ahead.
Using the public resourcing sector framework managed by Alexander Mann Solutions Ltd, UK Export Finance hired:
Financial year | Interim managers* | Specialist contractors* | Temporary staff* |
2018/19 | 4 | 2 | 8 |
2019/20 | 7 | 10 | 6 |
2020/21 | 9 | 11 | 8 |
2021/22 | 8 | 10 | 4 |
*The numbers quoted are full time equivalents
This information is not available to the Department for publication.
All the information used is already publicly available.
UKEF has allocated budget for the hiring of (a) interim managers, (b) specialist contractors and (c) temporary members. However, it should be noted that UKEF has not allocated a budget specifically to the public sector resourcing framework, which is managed by Alexander Mann Solutions Ltd.
The table below shows UKEF’s total off-payroll staff costs, including those relating to UKEF’s engagement via Alexander Mann Solutions Ltd.
Financial year | (a) Interim managers | (b) Specialist contractors | (c) Temporary staff |
2018/19 | £675,168 | £1,647,676 | £64,008 |
2019/20 | £689,532 | £796,051 | £141,192 |
2020/21 | £1,342,236 | £838,958 | £148,836 |
2021/22 (up to end of Oct 21) | £975,294 | £682,955 | £70,780 |
HGS UK Ltd is committed to providing a transparency report to the Department for International Trade. The report will not be published as it will contain commercially sensitive information.
We cannot specify the funding for these activities because it is contained within the overall value of the contract.
We cannot specify the funding for these activities because it is contained within the overall value of the contract.
The Export Support Service Contact Centre is delivered by 24 Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) UK based call handling agents, who are managed by 2 FTE Team Leaders.
The British Film Commission (BFC) is the national organisation responsible for maximising and supporting inward investment screen production. The UK was among the first countries in the world to realise the growth potential of High-End TV (HETV). This contract is a continuation of a long-term agreement between the Department for International Trade (DIT) and BFC, for the BFC to promote HETV inward investment and offer production support, that has delivered a strong track record of success in attracting such productions to the UK.
As with all DIT funding agreements, there is a robust evaluation framework in place against which the BFC’s performance will be assessed.
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 18th November to Question UIN: 74916.
The Department has not yet exercised these options.
The Department has not yet exercised these options.
The Department has not yet exercised these options.
People who call outside of core operating hours are referred to the Digital Enquiry Service. 24 calls were received outside core operating hours by the contact centre between 1 October and 12 November 2021. This data comes from management information supplied by the helpline and has had basic quality assurance checks.
926 helpline enquiries were received by the Export Support Services Contact Centre between 1 October and 12 November 2021. 99% of all calls were answered within 30 seconds. This data comes from management information supplied by the helpline and has had basic quality assurance checks.
We do not currently transfer calls. Businesses are provided with either online guidance or the details of relevant Government helplines to call.
It is not the policy of the Department for International Trade to release information into the public domain on companies to which it has provided export support. To do so, we would need the explicit permission of those organisations.
The Department of International Trade has not currently allocated any retainer fees for the provision of an Export Support Services Contact Centre.
As of 12 November 2021, the Export Support Service Contact Centre employs two UK based full-time Welsh speaking call handlers.
92% of enquiries have been resolved using the Knowledge Bank or by referring to another government department helpline between 1st October and 12 November 2021. The helpline has referred 8% of total enquiries to the Department for International Trade’s Digital Enquiry Service during the same period. This data comes from management information supplied by the helpline and has had basic quality assurance checks.
As this is a new service, we are currently working with the supplier on customer satisfaction metrics and data.
We have not received any formal complaints.
All callers to the Export Support Service Contact Centre are provided with relevant information to answer their query either during the call or via an email following the call. Complex queries are referred to the Digital Enquiry Service immediately following the call.
The General Aerospace Legal Panel is not reserved to UK companies only.
The purpose of the General Aerospace Legal Panel is to procure a panel of law firms to provide specialist legal advice and representation to UK Export Finance (UKEF), primarily in relation to when it provides ‘financing’ support to exporters in the aviation sector. The cost of such legal advice provided by the panel firm is typically met by the borrower rather than UKEF. The contract value advertised is the maximum value that can be spent through the framework during its four year term through subsequent call-off contracts and not the value of any committed spend.
The full specification, Invitation To Tender and terms and conditions of the General Aerospace Legal Panel have been published on the Contracts Finder notice.
The City Sprint UK Ltd courier service has provided the collection and delivery of building related goods between the Department for International Trade properties on an ad-hoc basis. This includes items such as documents, parcels and mail.
The services have been received between April 2021 and October 2021. Due to systems limitations the duration is incorrectly reported as 4 days and we are seeking to correct this.
The Department for International Trade, alongside other government departments, closely monitors trends and events in the Chinese economy and maintains close contact with British companies with trade and investment interests in China, supporting them as necessary. The United Kingdom’s financial regulators have ensured the financial system is resilient. It is for British companies to assess what changes in China’s economic conditions, and Chinese policy changes, mean for them.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) actively monitors its portfolio. As of 31 October 2021, UKEF’s exposure in China was around £200m, mainly related to supporting exports in the airline sector. UKEF has not had any issues around unpaid debts or defaults with its exposure in China.
The Department for International Trade, alongside other government departments, closely monitors trends and events in the Chinese economy and maintains close contact with British companies with trade and investment interests in China, supporting them as necessary. The United Kingdom’s financial regulators have ensured the financial system is resilient. It is for British companies to assess what changes in China’s economic conditions, and Chinese policy changes, mean for them.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) actively monitors its portfolio. As of 31 October 2021, UKEF’s exposure in China was around £200m, mainly related to supporting exports in the airline sector. UKEF has not had any issues around unpaid debts or defaults with its exposure in China.
The Department for International Trade, alongside other government departments, closely monitors trends and events in the Chinese economy and maintains close contact with British companies with trade and investment interests in China, supporting them as necessary. The United Kingdom’s financial regulators have ensured the financial system is resilient. It is for British companies to assess what changes in China’s economic conditions, and Chinese policy changes, mean for them.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) actively monitors its portfolio. As of 31 October 2021, UKEF’s exposure in China was around £200m, mainly related to supporting exports in the airline sector. UKEF has not had any issues around unpaid debts or defaults with its exposure in China.
The Department for International Trade, alongside other government departments, closely monitors trends and events in the Chinese economy and maintains close contact with British companies with trade and investment interests in China, supporting them as necessary. The United Kingdom’s financial regulators have ensured the financial system is resilient. It is for British companies to assess what changes in China’s economic conditions, and Chinese policy changes, mean for them.
UK Export Finance (UKEF) actively monitors its portfolio. As of 31 October 2021, UKEF’s exposure in China was around £200m, mainly related to supporting exports in the airline sector. UKEF has not had any issues around unpaid debts or defaults with its exposure in China.
Following the conclusion of negotiations, a full impact assessment will be published prior to scrutiny by Parliament. This will present the results of economic impacts of the agreement, including on UK sectoral output and employment and the potential implications for the UK nations and English regions.
In June 2020 the government published a scoping assessment, which provided a preliminary assessment of the potential long run impacts of an agreement with Australia. This contained potential implications for UK nations and English regions and is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uks-approach-to-negotiating-a-free-trade-agreement-with-australia.
The Modelling Review Expert Panel (which is external to the Department for International Trade (DIT)) has concluded their review. DIT is currently reviewing their recommendations and will provide an update on this review in due course.
The government is committed to a transparent approach to its new free trade agreements and will publish an independently scrutinised impact assessment when treaty text is laid in parliament.
As part of the process towards producing all of its analysis, the Department for International Trade constantly reviews and improves its methodologies to ensure they are as robust and accurate as possible and reflects best global practice. The methodology underlying our analysis and the rationale for methodological changes will be described in full in our published impact assessments.
The government is committed to a transparent approach to its new free trade agreements and will publish an independently scrutinised impact assessment when treaty text is laid in parliament.
As part of the process towards producing all of its analysis, the Department for International Trade constantly reviews and improves its methodologies to ensure they are as robust and accurate as possible and reflects best global practice. The methodology underlying our analysis and the rationale for methodological changes will be described in full in our published impact assessments.
The methodology used to assess the impact of our free trade agreements is described in full in each of our published analyses.
On 19 October 2021 the Department for International Trade (DIT) hosted a Global Investment Summit (GIS) bringing together global capital and UK investment opportunities. The GIS saw the announcement of 18 deals by companies from 10 countries worth £9.7bn (£9,654,000,000), creating over 30,000 jobs. This was on top of the £5.8bn already committed for sustainable projects since the launch of the Ten Point Plan.
To ensure the smooth and safe running of the event DIT contracted a courier service from Revisecatch Ltd (trading as eCourier) to deliver 261 Covid-19 test kits to delegates around London and the South East, as well as to collect them and deliver them for laboratory processing, between 13 and 17 October 2021.
The Department for International Trade commissioned a contract with LSE Enterprise on Trade and Investment Measurement on 1st October 2021. The contract details are publicly available here https://www.gov.uk/contracts-finder. No projects have been commissioned through this contract to date.
I refer the hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury to the answer I gave on 4 November, UIN: 67108.
I refer the hon. Member for Islington South and Finsbury to the answer I gave on 4 November, UIN: 67108.
Departments are not required to include meetings with foreign governments, or attendance at diplomatic functions hosted by foreign governments, in transparency returns.
Officials were not present at the event. A record of discussions was sent within 24 hours.
Some government business was discussed during the course of the event.
The publication in question relates to a business case submitted for assurance under the Cabinet Office spend control process. The Department has not incurred any spend to date on the proposed services.
The former Secretary of State for International Trade, Liz Truss met with Khaldoon al Mubarak (Chief Executive Officer of Mubadala), Waleed Al Mokarrib Al Muhairi (Deputy CEO of Mubadala), and Matthew Hurn (Chief Financial Officer, Alternative Investments and Infrastructure at Mubadala) on 19th April 2021.
There were no discussions of any proposals for a European Super League.
The departmental spend control data published on 21 October confirms amounts approved through the Cabinet Office Controls approval process, rather than actual expenditure. The monthly breakdown of actual expenditure on the Department for International Trade’s contract with Ernst & Young for the provision of investment support services can be found in transparency data on the Department’s spending over £25,000 here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/dit-spending-over-25000-january-2021.
The Government of Japan informed the Department of International Trade on 23 December 2020 that domestic procedures were complete for the protection of the seven geographical indications listed in the UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement.
Due to the commercial sensitivities, the figures released on 14th October 2021 were published in aggregate form. There were 46 individual investments included in the publication and, if they were broken down by characteristics such as location or sector, the small numbers would risk disclosure of the commercial sensitivity.
This was an event hosted by Department for International Trade Secretary of State Liz Truss for the US Trade Representative, Katherine Tai, as part of wider discussions around trade.
These expenses are for Tier 2 sponsorship application and visa payments for members of staff joining the department from overseas.
The UK champions rules-based multilateral trade at the WTO. The National Treatment rule under GATT Article III sets out the principle that imported products should not be subject to higher internal taxes than similar domestic products. The UK-EU TCA and CPTPP agreements reiterate this GATT Article III commitment on National Treatment. Measures such as setting excise duties on alcoholic beverages are consistent with the UK’s WTO rights and obligations, including GATT Article III commitments.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) currently secures the protection of the following UK Geographical Indications (GIs) in Japan: Stilton White Cheese, Stilton Blue Cheese, West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Irish Whiskey/Whisky, Irish Cream, Scotch Whisky.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) currently secures the protection of the following UK Geographical Indications (GIs) in Japan: Stilton White Cheese, Stilton Blue Cheese, West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Irish Whiskey/Whisky, Irish Cream, Scotch Whisky.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) currently secures the protection of the following UK Geographical Indications (GIs) in Japan: Stilton White Cheese, Stilton Blue Cheese, West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Irish Whiskey/Whisky, Irish Cream, Scotch Whisky.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) currently secures the protection of the following UK Geographical Indications (GIs) in Japan: Stilton White Cheese, Stilton Blue Cheese, West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Irish Whiskey/Whisky, Irish Cream, Scotch Whisky.
The UK-Japan Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) currently secures the protection of the following UK Geographical Indications (GIs) in Japan: Stilton White Cheese, Stilton Blue Cheese, West Country Farmhouse Cheddar Cheese, Scottish Farmed Salmon, Irish Whiskey/Whisky, Irish Cream, Scotch Whisky.
In 2020, one such Open Individual Export Licence was granted, for specific use by the Brazilian Navy in the maintenance and repair of their fleet while in port in Colombia.
Acceding to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) will not prevent the UK regulating in the public interest. CPTPP explicitly reaffirms states' right to regulate under international law. It also protects this right through numerous safeguards, including procedural provisions to minimise the impacts of frivolous and unsuccessful Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims faced by states.
Acceding to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) will not prevent the UK regulating in the public interest. CPTPP explicitly reaffirms states' right to regulate under international law. It also protects this right through numerous safeguards, including procedural provisions to minimise the impacts of frivolous and unsuccessful Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims faced by states.
Acceding to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) will not prevent the UK regulating in the public interest. CPTPP explicitly reaffirms states' right to regulate under international law. It also protects this right through numerous safeguards, including procedural provisions to minimise the impacts of frivolous and unsuccessful Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims faced by states.
Acceding to the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) will not prevent the UK regulating in the public interest. CPTPP explicitly reaffirms states' right to regulate under international law. It also protects this right through numerous safeguards, including procedural provisions to minimise the impacts of frivolous and unsuccessful Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) claims faced by states.
Question 44264 was answered on 22nd September.
The Department for International Trade is working closely with the Trade Remedies Authority to make sure the review is concluded as soon as possible, in accordance with the Written Ministerial Statement of 30th June.
HM Government has negotiated an unprecedented animal welfare chapter in the Anglo-Australian Trade Deal that includes a non-regression clause and cooperation commitments. Nothing in the agreement will prevent the United Kingdom from amending or introducing any new labelling requirements for products to be sold here.
This deal will not compromise our animal welfare standards and does not create new permissions for imports from Australia. All agri-food imports imported into the United Kingdom under existing or future free trade agreements will, as now, must comply with our import requirements.
We will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare, and food standards.
All goods coming into the United Kingdom must meet our relevant domestic rules. Legal protections for food standards and import requirements remain in place, including through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and our other EU Exit legislation. This provides a firm basis for maintaining the same high level of protection for both domestic and imported products.
The responses to the call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling.
We will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare, and food standards.
All goods coming into the United Kingdom must meet our relevant domestic rules. Legal protections for food standards and import requirements remain in place, including through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and our other EU Exit legislation. This provides a firm basis for maintaining the same high level of protection for both domestic and imported products.
The responses to the call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling.
We will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare, and food standards.
All goods coming into the United Kingdom must meet our relevant domestic rules. Legal protections for food standards and import requirements remain in place, including through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and our other EU Exit legislation. This provides a firm basis for maintaining the same high level of protection for both domestic and imported products.
The responses to the call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling.
We will not compromise on our high environmental protection, animal welfare, and food standards.
All goods coming into the United Kingdom must meet our relevant domestic rules. Legal protections for food standards and import requirements remain in place, including through the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and our other EU Exit legislation. This provides a firm basis for maintaining the same high level of protection for both domestic and imported products.
The responses to the call for evidence will be used to inform any future policy proposals on animal welfare labelling.
Legal services are crucial to the UK economy, contributing £29.2 billion (1.6%) to the UK’s gross value added (GVA) in 2020. The published assessments for these agreements assess the potential long-term impact on GVA for all business services, however they do not include a breakdown of the potential impact on legal services imports.
To support UK success in this sector, the Department for International Trade is seeking ambitious commitments in its Free Trade Agreements on cross-border trade in services, investment, mobility, and digital trade. This will reduce trade barriers, providing certainty and transparency for UK businesses, including legal services suppliers.