Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what communications and outreach strategies the Department is implementing to inform victims, legal representatives, and support organisations about their eligibility and the future availability of free sentencing-remarks transcripts, in light of the 498 applications processed under the Rape and Sexual Offences pilot.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
In May 2025, we announced that we would continue to enable victims of rape and other sexual offences, whose cases were heard in the Crown Court, to apply for free transcripts of the sentencing remarks in their case, on an on-going basis. This followed a one-year pilot which ran from May 2024.
We have taken the following steps to promote the provision:
Providing the Witness Service, whose role is to support victims and witnesses at court, with an information sheet on the scheme to distribute to any eligible victims
Publishing a dedicated webpage on Gov.uk
Sharing information on the scheme at a forum with over 70 national and local stakeholders who work with or represent victims.
And creating social media posts on X (formerly Twitter), Instagram and LinkedIn.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment his Department has made of the equity of the current eligibility criteria for the Long Service and Good Conduct Medal, including Regular Officers who were discharged before 29 July 2014 but who served the same qualifying period as those who have received the medal under the revised rule.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on 29 October 2025, to Question 84537.
https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-10-22/84537
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will set out how the Department’s planned reforms to enhance staff awareness of safeguarding roles and responsibilities will integrate new safeguarding frameworks into its organisational culture and operations, including guidance and training materials are accessible to staff with disabilities, provided in multiple formats, and include clear, direct routes to designated safeguarding leads.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Safeguarding is a priority for DWP. Year One of our multi-year strategy is about building strong foundations - raising awareness, strengthening capability, and deepening partnerships. This is not just a process change; it’s a fundamental culture shift to make safeguarding part of everyday business.
The Department already operates a tiered system of support for vulnerable customers. All staff are trained to recognise vulnerability and respond appropriately, with specialist help available for complex cases.
Frontline colleagues have access to guidance that supports them to refer individuals to external agencies with statutory responsibilities to protect people from harm, abuse or neglect when they identify safeguarding concerns.
The Department has committed to embedding Level 1 safeguarding training across the organisation. This provides employees with the knowledge and skills to recognise potential safeguarding concerns and to know what action to take and who to report to if they have concerns. We are offering this training to all DWP staff.
In addition, we have embedded Level 3 adult and child mandatory safeguarding for all clinicians across the organisation.
Our focus remains on making our training accessible. Design standards and design tools for DWP technical learning support a comprehensive range of learner needs, and DWP Service Delivery role based technical learning is fully compliant with the requirements of the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) (No. 2) Accessibility Regulations 2018. Alternative formats are provided, and arrangements are made to support learners’ reasonable adjustments.
We will continue to enable colleagues to complete Safeguarding training as part of their professional development, and we will track progress.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that executors are not held personally liable for council tax bills, including empty property premiums, on properties undergoing probate where Class F exemptions apply, particularly in cases where probate is delayed and executors have no access to estate funds.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
When a property has been left empty following the death of its owner or occupant, it is exempt from council tax for as long as it remains unoccupied and until probate is granted. Where probate is delayed, the exemption will continue until probate is granted. Following a grant of probate (or the signing of letters of administration), a further six months exemption is possible, so long as the property remains unoccupied and has not been sold or transferred to someone else.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what progress he has made on implementing the Private Parking Code of Practice; what steps the Government is taking to ensure that penalty charges issued by private parking operators are fair and proportionate; and whether a timetable has been set for introducing caps on such charges and measures to prevent aggressive enforcement tactics.
Answered by Miatta Fahnbulleh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
I wish to assure you that this government is determined to drive up standards in the private parking sector.
The new government code will contain guidance about the operation and management of private parking facilities and will protect motorists from bad practice, whilst supporting legitimate operators.
In preparation for the new code, in 2025 the government published a consultation document outlining its proposals to raise standards across the private parking industry.
All responses are now being analysed and the government will publish a response and outline its final plans in due course.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that Child Maintenance Service liability accurately reflects actual care arrangements, including in cases where the paying parent has become the primary carer but Child Benefit remains registered to the other parent.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules.
If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government.
The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides.
CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent.
Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements.
Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of mechanisms the Child Maintenance Service has to verify care arrangements with (a) local authorities and (b) schools; and whether collection action can be paused pending such verification.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules.
If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government.
The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides.
CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent.
Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements.
Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what processes are in place to (a) refund and (b) recoup Child Maintenance Service payments made in error following incorrect care-status determinations.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules.
If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government.
The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides.
CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent.
Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements.
Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the average time taken is for the Child Maintenance Service to adjust liability following notification of a change in care arrangements.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) works to ensure that liability adjustments following changes in care arrangements are processed as quickly and accurately as possible. These changes can vary in complexity, and the time taken depends on factors such as the availability of corroborating information from both parents and whether there is agreement on the new arrangements. Where there is disagreement or insufficient evidence, additional checks are required, which can extend the timescale. The CMS is expanding digital channels and online messaging to allow parents to submit information more quickly, helping to reduce delays.
The Department for Work and Pensions does not currently publish an official average timescale for adjustments to child maintenance liability following notification of a change in care arrangements (for example, shared care or main carer modifications). Therefore, the information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost. However, CMS remains committed to improving timeliness and accuracy in processing changes by investing in service modernisation, enhancing digital tools, and streamlining processes to deliver a faster and fairer service for all customers.
Asked by: Gideon Amos (Liberal Democrat - Taunton and Wellington)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing an expedited pathway for Child Maintenance Service cases involving (a) safeguarding concerns, (b) homelessness risk or (c) significant financial hardship.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) is committed to ensuring that it delivers a safe service that is sensitive to the needs of all the parents that use it. We recognise that some parents may be vulnerable, particularly at a time of separation.
It is our priority to handle these cases in a sensitive manner and ensure vulnerable customers get the help and support they need to use the service safely.
The CMS already has processes in place to identify safeguarding concerns and is well prepared to respond quickly and effectively if it becomes aware that the safety of any of its customers are at risk. All caseworkers receive extensive training and follow a well-managed process with clear steps to support vulnerable customers.
The CMS recognises socio-economic factors such as deprivation, unmanageable debt, poor housing, and unemployment, CMS Caseworkers use a District Provision Toolkit (DPT) with clear steps to support vulnerable clients, including those at risk of homelessness. This toolkit is regularly reviewed.
Caseworkers also use the Affordability Hub for signposting and Advanced Customer Support (ACS) to support all customers who are vulnerable and deemed at risk from abuse, harm or neglect. These tools are available at any and every stage of the case journey, not just at applications.
DWP has recruited Advanced Customer Support Senior Leaders (ACSSLs), forming a nationwide network of support that provides clear escalation routes for cases. ACSSLs are instrumental in forming strong, far reaching, external relationships with a range of partner organisations and across DWP’s internal teams.
Internally, ACSSLs have a responsibility to raise any service design or delivery issues that are identified as potential causes of negative customer experience, escalating these to the appropriate teams.