Points of Order

James Cartlidge Excerpts

Tuesday 25th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[James Cartlidge (South Suffolk) (Con)]

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I seek your guidance about a piece of so-called ministerial correspondence that I have received, which is the worst I have ever had the displeasure to receive as a Member of Parliament. I am serious.

Mine is a rural constituency and the family farm tax is an extremely serious matter. It is an existential threat to many businesses in my constituency. Earlier this month, I wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer setting out a serious, detailed argument about why it has such an impact. I spoke about mental health and the wider economic impact, and I expected a reasonable reply to my ask to reconsider the tax tomorrow.

I received yesterday a letter that states just this, and it is not a holding reply:

“I can confirm we have shared your letter with the relevant policy officials in the department.

Thank you again for taking the time to make me aware of your concerns.”

That is the letter signed by the correspondence and enquiries unit at HM Treasury, and not by a Minister.

Is it acceptable for us to have ministerial correspondence that is not from Ministers? Is it acceptable for it not even to go to a Minister but to the relevant policy officials? Is it acceptable, on such an important matter, to have all the points in it completely ignored?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I thank the hon. Member for his point of order. It is disappointing to hear that he has not received a more substantive response to the concerns raised by his constituents. Ministers themselves are responsible for their own correspondence, and the Government’s ministerial code states:

“Ministers should, where possible, provide full and timely responses”

to such correspondence. Those on the Treasury Bench will have heard his concerns, but he may also wish to raise his concerns with the Leader of the House.