Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Major employment drive to help unlock 200,000 new jobs and apprenticeships for next generation, published on 16 March 2026, what estimate he has made of the proportion of young people supported by the programme who will remain in employment 12 months after starting work.

Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Youth Jobs Grant is specifically targeted at young people because of the risk of lifelong scarring impacts of extended unemployment at a young age and to support the Government’s commitment to reducing the number of young people not in education, employment or training.

The Youth Jobs Grant is designed to help employers with the early costs of hiring eligible young people. The first payment will not be made until after we’ve had confirmation through other sources that the young person has been employed, and the final payment will not be made until after several months of employment to encourage retention. As with all our employment programmes, we will monitor delivery to ensure the Grant is being used as intended, which is to expand opportunities for young people who need help to enter the labour market.

We estimate there are 200,000 young people eligible for the Youth Jobs Grant now, and we expect to support 60,000 young people with this over three years. We are also expanding the Jobs Guarantee to a wider age range, from 18-21 to 18-24, to create more than 35,000 extra subsidised jobs. This brings the total to be supported through the scheme to over 90,000 in the next three years.

The Youth Jobs Grant is available to employers in all sectors across Great Britain. The roles supported will depend on employers’ hiring needs rather than sector specific targets. We expect more take up in sectors that traditionally recruit young people, such as retail, hospitality, health and social care, logistics and construction, alongside opportunities in growth sectors including digital, engineering and green technologies.

The purpose of the Grant is to help young people into work by reducing the upfront costs of hiring, and it has been designed using evidence from previous schemes in the UK and wider international practice. As with all new programmes, we will monitor delivery and evaluate outcomes, including employment sustainment, once the scheme is in operation.

Further practical details on how employers will claim the Grant will be set out in guidance ahead of the scheme launching.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Major employment drive to help unlock 200,000 new jobs and apprenticeships for next generation, published on 16 March 2026, what analysis his Department has undertaken of the sectors most likely to create jobs under the youth employment drive.

Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Youth Jobs Grant is specifically targeted at young people because of the risk of lifelong scarring impacts of extended unemployment at a young age and to support the Government’s commitment to reducing the number of young people not in education, employment or training.

The Youth Jobs Grant is designed to help employers with the early costs of hiring eligible young people. The first payment will not be made until after we’ve had confirmation through other sources that the young person has been employed, and the final payment will not be made until after several months of employment to encourage retention. As with all our employment programmes, we will monitor delivery to ensure the Grant is being used as intended, which is to expand opportunities for young people who need help to enter the labour market.

We estimate there are 200,000 young people eligible for the Youth Jobs Grant now, and we expect to support 60,000 young people with this over three years. We are also expanding the Jobs Guarantee to a wider age range, from 18-21 to 18-24, to create more than 35,000 extra subsidised jobs. This brings the total to be supported through the scheme to over 90,000 in the next three years.

The Youth Jobs Grant is available to employers in all sectors across Great Britain. The roles supported will depend on employers’ hiring needs rather than sector specific targets. We expect more take up in sectors that traditionally recruit young people, such as retail, hospitality, health and social care, logistics and construction, alongside opportunities in growth sectors including digital, engineering and green technologies.

The purpose of the Grant is to help young people into work by reducing the upfront costs of hiring, and it has been designed using evidence from previous schemes in the UK and wider international practice. As with all new programmes, we will monitor delivery and evaluate outcomes, including employment sustainment, once the scheme is in operation.

Further practical details on how employers will claim the Grant will be set out in guidance ahead of the scheme launching.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Major employment drive to help unlock 200,000 new jobs and apprenticeships for next generation, published on 16 March 2026, what estimate he has made of the number of young people aged 18–24 who have been claiming Universal Credit for six months or more and would therefore be eligible for the Youth Jobs Grant scheme.

Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Youth Jobs Grant is specifically targeted at young people because of the risk of lifelong scarring impacts of extended unemployment at a young age and to support the Government’s commitment to reducing the number of young people not in education, employment or training.

The Youth Jobs Grant is designed to help employers with the early costs of hiring eligible young people. The first payment will not be made until after we’ve had confirmation through other sources that the young person has been employed, and the final payment will not be made until after several months of employment to encourage retention. As with all our employment programmes, we will monitor delivery to ensure the Grant is being used as intended, which is to expand opportunities for young people who need help to enter the labour market.

We estimate there are 200,000 young people eligible for the Youth Jobs Grant now, and we expect to support 60,000 young people with this over three years. We are also expanding the Jobs Guarantee to a wider age range, from 18-21 to 18-24, to create more than 35,000 extra subsidised jobs. This brings the total to be supported through the scheme to over 90,000 in the next three years.

The Youth Jobs Grant is available to employers in all sectors across Great Britain. The roles supported will depend on employers’ hiring needs rather than sector specific targets. We expect more take up in sectors that traditionally recruit young people, such as retail, hospitality, health and social care, logistics and construction, alongside opportunities in growth sectors including digital, engineering and green technologies.

The purpose of the Grant is to help young people into work by reducing the upfront costs of hiring, and it has been designed using evidence from previous schemes in the UK and wider international practice. As with all new programmes, we will monitor delivery and evaluate outcomes, including employment sustainment, once the scheme is in operation.

Further practical details on how employers will claim the Grant will be set out in guidance ahead of the scheme launching.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Major employment drive to help unlock 200,000 new jobs and apprenticeships for next generation, published on 16 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to ensure that employers do not repeatedly cycle through short-term subsidised workers.

Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Youth Jobs Grant is specifically targeted at young people because of the risk of lifelong scarring impacts of extended unemployment at a young age and to support the Government’s commitment to reducing the number of young people not in education, employment or training.

The Youth Jobs Grant is designed to help employers with the early costs of hiring eligible young people. The first payment will not be made until after we’ve had confirmation through other sources that the young person has been employed, and the final payment will not be made until after several months of employment to encourage retention. As with all our employment programmes, we will monitor delivery to ensure the Grant is being used as intended, which is to expand opportunities for young people who need help to enter the labour market.

We estimate there are 200,000 young people eligible for the Youth Jobs Grant now, and we expect to support 60,000 young people with this over three years. We are also expanding the Jobs Guarantee to a wider age range, from 18-21 to 18-24, to create more than 35,000 extra subsidised jobs. This brings the total to be supported through the scheme to over 90,000 in the next three years.

The Youth Jobs Grant is available to employers in all sectors across Great Britain. The roles supported will depend on employers’ hiring needs rather than sector specific targets. We expect more take up in sectors that traditionally recruit young people, such as retail, hospitality, health and social care, logistics and construction, alongside opportunities in growth sectors including digital, engineering and green technologies.

The purpose of the Grant is to help young people into work by reducing the upfront costs of hiring, and it has been designed using evidence from previous schemes in the UK and wider international practice. As with all new programmes, we will monitor delivery and evaluate outcomes, including employment sustainment, once the scheme is in operation.

Further practical details on how employers will claim the Grant will be set out in guidance ahead of the scheme launching.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions he had had with the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust about staff satisfaction levels.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, has not held direct discussions with the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (EEAST) on staff satisfaction levels.

The wellbeing and staff satisfaction in EEAST is a priority, and my Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, is committed to working with NHS England to support EEAST to deliver the urgent reforms required with staff and patient voices at the heart of our approach.

EEAST is engaging with NHS England to oversee and support sustained momentum in delivering cultural change within ambulance trusts. NHS England central and regional teams are working closely with the trust on other actions to support the workforce more widely, including on safeguarding, mental health support, and external Freedom to Speak Up provision.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether workforce levels in a) urgent treatment centres, b) same-day emergency care and c) NHS 111 are adequate to deliver the objectives of the Urgent and Emergency Care Plan.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Decisions on workforce levels and recruitment are a matter for individual National Health Service employers, who manage resources at a local level to ensure they have the staff they need to deliver safe and effective care.

The Government is committed to publishing a 10 Year Workforce Plan to set out action to create a workforce ready to deliver the transformed service set out in the 10-Year Health Plan. The 10 Year Workforce Plan will ensure the NHS has the right people in the right places, with the right skills to care for patients, when they need it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to Answer of 23rd March 2026 to Question 115902, on Accident and Emergency Departments: Standards, what estimate he has made of the number of patients waiting more than 12 hours in Accident and Emergency before being seen by a doctor.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The 12‑hour accident and emergency (A&E) performance metric recorded and reported by National Health Service trusts measures the time from a patient’s arrival in an emergency department to their admission, transfer, or discharge. This period includes triage, clinical assessments, diagnostics, and treatment, and patients may be seen by one or more clinicians during this time, or in some cases may not require assessment by a doctor depending on their acuity and care pathway.

There is a national target that patients receive an initial clinical assessment within 15 minutes of arrival in A&E. This assessment considers patient acuity, ensuring those most unwell and at greatest risk are identified and prioritised, so that clinical oversight can be adjusted accordingly and to ensure the sickest patients are seen first.

The Department does not hold an estimate of the number of patients who wait more than 12 hours in A&E before being seen by a doctor, as “being seen by a doctor” is not a data point that is routinely captured or reported.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to support the retention of ambulance service staff.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

People working in the National Health Service do so because they want to make a significant difference in people's lives by providing great quality healthcare. In turn, we need to ensure that we support them throughout their careers, providing access to training and development, and that they can work in an environment that is supportive, rewarding and inclusive.

NHS England already has an extensive retention programme that addresses matters that are important to staff such as good occupational health support, options for working more flexibly and better culture and leadership.

Targeted retention work continues through the NHS Retention Programme, which works with trusts to help them understand why staff have left. This has focused on better support for line managers including a staff retention guide, improved support for new joiners to the NHS and enhanced support for staff going through the menopause.

As set out in the 10-Year Health Plan, the Government is committed to making the NHS the best place to work, by supporting and retaining our hardworking and dedicated healthcare professionals.

The 10 Year Workforce Plan will set out how we will deliver this change by making sure that staff are better treated, have more fulfilling roles, and hope for the future. This includes the development of a new set of staff standards for modern employment which will reaffirm our commitment to improving retention, and which are likely to focus on flexible working, improving staff health and wellbeing, and dealing with violence, racism, and sexual harassment in the NHS workplace.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to Answer of 9 March 2026 to Question 115668, what proportion of the £250 million allocated to expand same day and urgent care services will be distributed to a) NHS trusts and b) ICBs.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

NHS England is responsible for the operational delivery of the £250 million capital investment to continue expanding same day emergency care and co‑located urgent treatment centres.

NHS England has confirmed that this funding will support 40 schemes in 2025/26, comprising 15 new services and 25 expansions. This includes ten new urgent treatment centres (UTCs) and four UTC expansions, alongside five new same day emergency care (SDEC) services and 21 SDEC expansions.

The schemes were selected based on business cases submitted by National Health Service trusts who will draw down the funding directly.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to Answer of 9 March 2026 to Question 115668, what proportion of the £250 million investment in same day and urgent care services will be used to a) expand existing facilities and b) fund new services.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

NHS England is responsible for the operational delivery of the £250 million capital investment to continue expanding same day emergency care and co‑located urgent treatment centres.

NHS England has confirmed that this funding will support 40 schemes in 2025/26, comprising 15 new services and 25 expansions. This includes ten new urgent treatment centres (UTCs) and four UTC expansions, alongside five new same day emergency care (SDEC) services and 21 SDEC expansions.

The schemes were selected based on business cases submitted by National Health Service trusts who will draw down the funding directly.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether she has considered introducing restrictions on the use of brachycephalic animals in advertising, film, television and social media promotions.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to raise public awareness of the health risks associated with brachycephalic animals.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions she has had with the Advertising Standards Authority on the portrayal of brachycephalic animals in advertising.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what information her Department holds on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK, including (a) dogs, (b) cats, and (c) rabbits.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of trends in the ownership of brachycephalic animals over the last five years.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of brachycephalic breeding practices on the welfare of those animals.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether she plans to introduce (a) new regulations and (b) primary legislation on brachycephalic animals.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of animal welfare regulations in protecting brachycephalic dog breeds.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to help reduce the incidence of Brachycephalic Obstructive Airway Syndrome in domestically-bred dogs.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of social media and advertising on demand for brachycephalic breeds.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions she has had with campaign groups and animal welfare organisations on the breeding of animals with brachycephaly.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what information her Department holds on the number of dogs with Brachycephalic Obstructive Airway Syndrome.

Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

Dog breeders licensed under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) Regulations are prohibited from breeding dogs if it can be reasonably expected that on the basis of their genotype, phenotype or health, this would lead to welfare problems for the mother or the puppies.

The Department does not hold data on the number of brachycephalic animals in the UK.

As part of the Animal Welfare Strategy, the Government committed to launch a consultation on dog breeding reform. This will include proposals to improve the health and welfare standards which all licensed breeders must meet.

The strategy also includes a commitment to improve our understanding of the size, scale and current management practices related to cat breeding, drawing on expertise from the sector, and consider any further steps which may improve welfare practices in the cat breeding sector.

The strategy was developed following engagement with key stakeholders alongside consideration of sector evidence and reports, such as the Animal Welfare Committee’s reports on canine and feline breeding practices. We continue to engage with representatives across the sector.

Defra also supports the work of the UK Brachycephalic Working Group (BWG), which is comprised of academia, the veterinary profession, and animal charities. The BWG has set out simple measures to address issues with brachycephalic dogs, such as not using imagery of dogs with brachycephaly for advertising unless it is aimed specifically at protecting the health and welfare of dogs in relation to brachycephaly. BWG members have committed to these measures, and other groups are encouraged to sign up to them too.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what the main causes of delays are between triage and clinical assessment in accident and emergency departments.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

We remain committed to improving patient experience and reducing waiting times across all accident and emergency departments.

While NHS England sets expectations that patients attending accident and emergency departments should receive an initial clinical assessment within 15 minutes, this is guidance rather than a target and as such, performance is not routinely monitored centrally for all trusts for all patients.

Triage is a clinical assessment of a person's presenting need and urgency, and it can be part of the initial clinical assessment or completed prior to it, depending on patients' needs. We do not routinely collect data about the reasons for any delays between these two parts of clinical assessment, where they are conducted separately.

NHS England continues to monitor urgent and emergency care performance through a range of indicators, including waiting times, time to treatment, and overall patient flow. Work is ongoing to improve timely assessment and care, including through investment in workforce, streaming models, and front-door clinical triage.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether the target for initial assessment within 15 minutes in accident and emergency departments is being met in each NHS trust.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

We remain committed to improving patient experience and reducing waiting times across all accident and emergency departments.

While NHS England sets expectations that patients attending accident and emergency departments should receive an initial clinical assessment within 15 minutes, this is guidance rather than a target and as such, performance is not routinely monitored centrally for all trusts for all patients.

Triage is a clinical assessment of a person's presenting need and urgency, and it can be part of the initial clinical assessment or completed prior to it, depending on patients' needs. We do not routinely collect data about the reasons for any delays between these two parts of clinical assessment, where they are conducted separately.

NHS England continues to monitor urgent and emergency care performance through a range of indicators, including waiting times, time to treatment, and overall patient flow. Work is ongoing to improve timely assessment and care, including through investment in workforce, streaming models, and front-door clinical triage.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of the impact of extending repayment periods on the overall recovery of debt owed to government.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what estimate she has made of the cost to the public purse of implementing more flexible repayment arrangements.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what metrics will be used to assess whether repayment plans are genuinely affordable for individuals.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what interest will be charged on people impacted by new debt repayment proposals.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether shadow councils will be permitted to decide whether to retain the all out election frequency, or move to elections by thirds or halves after the 2027 election.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

Subject to Parliamentary approval, new unitary councils are expected to take on full council functions from 1 April 2028, with elections to new shadow councils in May 2027. The scheme of elections for the new councils will be set out in the Structural Changes Order, with all‑out elections expected, in line with previous reorganisations.

Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, only certain types of councils may resolve to move from whole‑council elections to elections by thirds, and these provisions do not apply to newly established councils.

As set out in the Secretary of State’s letter of 26 March 2026, it is anticipated that the Structural Changes Order will be brought forward in the Autumn. No decisions have yet been taken on the warding arrangements, including how many wards there will be and how many councillors will serve each ward. As set out in the Department’s letter of 26 March, councils in Essex have been asked to submit their suggested interim warding arrangements, based on existing wards, divisions and parish boundaries, by 29 May for inclusion in the Structural Changes Order.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether new shadow council wards in South West Essex Council will be required to have three councillors each.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

Subject to Parliamentary approval, new unitary councils are expected to take on full council functions from 1 April 2028, with elections to new shadow councils in May 2027. The scheme of elections for the new councils will be set out in the Structural Changes Order, with all‑out elections expected, in line with previous reorganisations.

Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, only certain types of councils may resolve to move from whole‑council elections to elections by thirds, and these provisions do not apply to newly established councils.

As set out in the Secretary of State’s letter of 26 March 2026, it is anticipated that the Structural Changes Order will be brought forward in the Autumn. No decisions have yet been taken on the warding arrangements, including how many wards there will be and how many councillors will serve each ward. As set out in the Department’s letter of 26 March, councils in Essex have been asked to submit their suggested interim warding arrangements, based on existing wards, divisions and parish boundaries, by 29 May for inclusion in the Structural Changes Order.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of the risk that improved repayment terms may incentivise delayed payment or strategic non-payment.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what additional support will be offered to individuals identified as being in financial difficulty beyond revised repayment schedules.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

Some government organisations share information to support debt management, including to help assess an individual’s ability to pay. Where data is shared, it may include information relating to income, employment and benefits, depending on the purpose, the lawful gateway and the specific debt and department involved. This data can be used as a way to distinguish between financial hardship and deliberate non-payment. Departments and ALBs will apply their own policies and statutory frameworks when determining the most appropriate approach to debt recovery, but government guidance on support for those in financial difficulty is available at Public Sector Toolkits - GOV.UK.

Any sharing and use of personal data for debt management purposes is carried out in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. Where data sharing takes place under the Digital Economy Act 2017, it is subject to the Act’s statutory framework and the Digital Economy Act Code of Practice, including requirements and principles on lawful purpose, necessity and proportionality, security and accountability.

Performance against the strategy will be monitored by the GDMF in line with the Cabinet Office functional standards and governance requirements. Where monitoring indicates that intended improvements are not being achieved, the GDMF will use established functional governance to work with departments and ALBs to understand the issues and support improvements, including through guidance, sharing good practice and engagement with relevant organisations.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what types of data will be shared between departments to assess individuals’ ability to repay debts under the new strategy.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

Some government organisations share information to support debt management, including to help assess an individual’s ability to pay. Where data is shared, it may include information relating to income, employment and benefits, depending on the purpose, the lawful gateway and the specific debt and department involved. This data can be used as a way to distinguish between financial hardship and deliberate non-payment. Departments and ALBs will apply their own policies and statutory frameworks when determining the most appropriate approach to debt recovery, but government guidance on support for those in financial difficulty is available at Public Sector Toolkits - GOV.UK.

Any sharing and use of personal data for debt management purposes is carried out in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. Where data sharing takes place under the Digital Economy Act 2017, it is subject to the Act’s statutory framework and the Digital Economy Act Code of Practice, including requirements and principles on lawful purpose, necessity and proportionality, security and accountability.

Performance against the strategy will be monitored by the GDMF in line with the Cabinet Office functional standards and governance requirements. Where monitoring indicates that intended improvements are not being achieved, the GDMF will use established functional governance to work with departments and ALBs to understand the issues and support improvements, including through guidance, sharing good practice and engagement with relevant organisations.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to protect personal data used to determine repayment affordability.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

Some government organisations share information to support debt management, including to help assess an individual’s ability to pay. Where data is shared, it may include information relating to income, employment and benefits, depending on the purpose, the lawful gateway and the specific debt and department involved. This data can be used as a way to distinguish between financial hardship and deliberate non-payment. Departments and ALBs will apply their own policies and statutory frameworks when determining the most appropriate approach to debt recovery, but government guidance on support for those in financial difficulty is available at Public Sector Toolkits - GOV.UK.

Any sharing and use of personal data for debt management purposes is carried out in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. Where data sharing takes place under the Digital Economy Act 2017, it is subject to the Act’s statutory framework and the Digital Economy Act Code of Practice, including requirements and principles on lawful purpose, necessity and proportionality, security and accountability.

Performance against the strategy will be monitored by the GDMF in line with the Cabinet Office functional standards and governance requirements. Where monitoring indicates that intended improvements are not being achieved, the GDMF will use established functional governance to work with departments and ALBs to understand the issues and support improvements, including through guidance, sharing good practice and engagement with relevant organisations.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, whether guidance will be issued to departments to distinguish between deliberate non-payment and financial hardship.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

Some government organisations share information to support debt management, including to help assess an individual’s ability to pay. Where data is shared, it may include information relating to income, employment and benefits, depending on the purpose, the lawful gateway and the specific debt and department involved. This data can be used as a way to distinguish between financial hardship and deliberate non-payment. Departments and ALBs will apply their own policies and statutory frameworks when determining the most appropriate approach to debt recovery, but government guidance on support for those in financial difficulty is available at Public Sector Toolkits - GOV.UK.

Any sharing and use of personal data for debt management purposes is carried out in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. Where data sharing takes place under the Digital Economy Act 2017, it is subject to the Act’s statutory framework and the Digital Economy Act Code of Practice, including requirements and principles on lawful purpose, necessity and proportionality, security and accountability.

Performance against the strategy will be monitored by the GDMF in line with the Cabinet Office functional standards and governance requirements. Where monitoring indicates that intended improvements are not being achieved, the GDMF will use established functional governance to work with departments and ALBs to understand the issues and support improvements, including through guidance, sharing good practice and engagement with relevant organisations.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what contingency plans are in place if the strategy does not lead to improved repayment outcomes.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

Some government organisations share information to support debt management, including to help assess an individual’s ability to pay. Where data is shared, it may include information relating to income, employment and benefits, depending on the purpose, the lawful gateway and the specific debt and department involved. This data can be used as a way to distinguish between financial hardship and deliberate non-payment. Departments and ALBs will apply their own policies and statutory frameworks when determining the most appropriate approach to debt recovery, but government guidance on support for those in financial difficulty is available at Public Sector Toolkits - GOV.UK.

Any sharing and use of personal data for debt management purposes is carried out in accordance with the UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Data Protection Act 2018. Where data sharing takes place under the Digital Economy Act 2017, it is subject to the Act’s statutory framework and the Digital Economy Act Code of Practice, including requirements and principles on lawful purpose, necessity and proportionality, security and accountability.

Performance against the strategy will be monitored by the GDMF in line with the Cabinet Office functional standards and governance requirements. Where monitoring indicates that intended improvements are not being achieved, the GDMF will use established functional governance to work with departments and ALBs to understand the issues and support improvements, including through guidance, sharing good practice and engagement with relevant organisations.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what estimate she has made of the proportion of people in government debt repayment plans who are currently making payments deemed unaffordable.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of the number of individuals who currently are in debt who will be affected by the affordable repayment plans under the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what reduction in default rates she expects as a result of introducing more tailored and affordable repayment plans.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, whether individuals will have the right to challenge affordability assessments made using automated or data-driven systems.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of variations in repayment practices between departments prior to the introduction of the new strategy.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, which types of debt owed to government will be included within the scope of the new affordability measures.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what measures will be used to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage.

Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs.

Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type.

Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to council leaders in Essex on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, when he plans to bring forward legislation to implement his decision on local government reorganisation in Essex.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

Subject to Parliamentary approval, new unitary councils are expected to take on full council functions from 1 April 2028, with elections to new shadow councils in May 2027. The scheme of elections for the new councils will be set out in the Structural Changes Order, with all‑out elections expected, in line with previous reorganisations.

Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, only certain types of councils may resolve to move from whole‑council elections to elections by thirds, and these provisions do not apply to newly established councils.

As set out in the Secretary of State’s letter of 26 March 2026, it is anticipated that the Structural Changes Order will be brought forward in the Autumn. No decisions have yet been taken on the warding arrangements, including how many wards there will be and how many councillors will serve each ward. As set out in the Department’s letter of 26 March, councils in Essex have been asked to submit their suggested interim warding arrangements, based on existing wards, divisions and parish boundaries, by 29 May for inclusion in the Structural Changes Order.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average time taken to complete a physical inspection of a shipping container was in each of the three most recent years for which data is available.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of containers inspected were found to be in breach of customs, safety or import regulations in each of the last three years.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many shipping containers entering the UK were subject to physical inspection in each of the last three years.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what proportion of all shipping containers entering the UK were physically inspected in each of the last three years.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the impact of container inspections on port congestion and processing times.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to prevent companies relocating to the UK to avoid regulatory or legal obligations in their original jurisdiction.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.

To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.

Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.

Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, how the proposed re-domiciliation regime will interact with recent reforms to Companies House, including identity verification requirements.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.

To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.

Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.

Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, whether companies relocating under the proposed regime will be required to settle outstanding tax liabilities in their original jurisdiction.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.

To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.

Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.

Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what criteria will be used to determine whether an overseas company can transfer its incorporation to the UK.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:

• Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.
• Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.
• Are solvent.
• Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.
• Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, whether companies from all jurisdictions will be eligible to re-domicile to the UK under the proposed reforms.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:

• Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.
• Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.
• Are solvent.
• Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.
• Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what timetable he has set for introducing legislation to implement the re-domiciliation regime.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

A corporate re-domiciliation regime will require primary legislation to implement the required changes to company, insolvency and tax legislation. The Government is committed to introducing legislation when parliamentary time allows.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether nomination to be the Essex County Council representative on the Joint Committee will be determined by (a) the full council, (b) the local county councillors, (c) the district council, or (d) someone else.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process.

Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether the total number of councillors per new local authority can be amended from the currently announced figures during the initial local government boundary review process.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process.

Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what plans he has to introduce a catch-up MenB vaccination programme for those born before May 2015 who were not eligible for the routine infant programme.

Answered by Sharon Hodgson - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is an expert scientific advisory committee that advises the Government on eligibility for vaccination and immunisation programmes. The JCVI have been consulted on the immediate vaccine response to the outbreak and clinical effectiveness of potential future outbreak response vaccination strategies.

On the 17 March my Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, also announced to the House of Commons that he would ask the JCVI to review eligibility for meningococcal B vaccination. The JCVI will conduct a full assessment of the cost-effectiveness of a routine adolescent meningococcal B vaccination programme and provide a complete and formal response to my Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, as soon as practicable.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of extending MenB vaccinations to all teenagers and university students on public health.

Answered by Sharon Hodgson - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is an expert scientific advisory committee that advises the Government on eligibility for vaccination and immunisation programmes. The JCVI have been consulted on the immediate vaccine response to the outbreak and clinical effectiveness of potential future outbreak response vaccination strategies.

On the 17 March my Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, also announced to the House of Commons that he would ask the JCVI to review eligibility for meningococcal B vaccination. The JCVI will conduct a full assessment of the cost-effectiveness of a routine adolescent meningococcal B vaccination programme and provide a complete and formal response to my Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, as soon as practicable.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to ensure fair and equal representation of voters in light of his Department’s stated expectation that the usual criteria are unlikely to be met in the same way as a full review.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process.

Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, why his Department believe the usual criteria are unlikely to be met in the same way as a full review, regarding the initial proposal of ward boundaries.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process.

Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether the public and local parties will be able to contribute to the initial boundary review process.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process.

Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation.

The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second.

As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, which types of overseas companies will be eligible to relocate to the UK under the proposed regime.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:

• Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.
• Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.
• Are solvent.
• Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.
• Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what assessment he has made of the capacity of Companies House to process an increased volume of company registrations resulting from the reforms.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

The Department for Business and Trade will continue to work closely with Companies House to ensure the regime will be implemented effectively and applications can be processed in a timely manner.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what discussions she has had with the Home Secretary and the Justice Secretary on strengthening enforcement against online fraud, especially in relation to fraudulent advertising on social media platforms.

Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

Ministers have regular meetings with Cabinet colleagues on a range of subjects including online fraud. The government is committed to a coordinated, cross-government approach to online fraud.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what quantitative assessment he has made of the potential economic benefits of introducing a re-domiciliation regime.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

The Government has published an analytical paper alongside the consultation providing a high-level assessment of the likely impacts. Initial analysis suggests that the regime would help to make the UK more attractive to companies wishing to change their domicile and signal the UK’s openness to business, and position as a global centre. The impact on the UK economy is therefore expected to be positive, but the scale of that impact is uncertain. A further, more detailed assessment, incorporating the findings of the consultation, will be produced to accompany the legislation that introduces the re-domiciliation regime.

During the Department’s stakeholder engagement, some companies indicated that they decided against moving to the UK under the current system, which they found to be prohibitive. However, the Department is unable to estimate the overall number of non-UK companies that have been deterred from relocating to the UK under the current system as this is not information that is ordinarily published or announced by companies.

Question to the Department for Business and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what estimate he has made of the number of overseas companies which have been deterred from relocating to the UK under the current system.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)

The Government has published an analytical paper alongside the consultation providing a high-level assessment of the likely impacts. Initial analysis suggests that the regime would help to make the UK more attractive to companies wishing to change their domicile and signal the UK’s openness to business, and position as a global centre. The impact on the UK economy is therefore expected to be positive, but the scale of that impact is uncertain. A further, more detailed assessment, incorporating the findings of the consultation, will be produced to accompany the legislation that introduces the re-domiciliation regime.

During the Department’s stakeholder engagement, some companies indicated that they decided against moving to the UK under the current system, which they found to be prohibitive. However, the Department is unable to estimate the overall number of non-UK companies that have been deterred from relocating to the UK under the current system as this is not information that is ordinarily published or announced by companies.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how containers awaiting inspection are prioritised, including whether perishable or time-sensitive goods are given priority.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what information is provided to importers on the expected timeframe for inspection of their containers.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many containers are awaiting inspection at London Gateway Port.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many containers have been held for more than (a) 7 days, (b) 14 days and (c) 21 days awaiting inspection in the last year.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the average waiting time is for a container inspection at London Gateway Port.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what steps are being taken to prevent the displacement of scam centres across international borders.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the actions taken by Southeast Asian host countries to investigate and shut down scam centres operating within their territories.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, whether any diplomatic or economic measures are being considered against countries that fail to act against scam centres targeting British citizens.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, which host countries, other than Cambodia, have taken enforcement action against individuals or networks linked to scam centres targeted by UK sanctions.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, how many individuals linked to scam centres targeting UK citizens have been (a) arrested, (b) charged and (c) prosecuted in their host countries.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what assessment he has made of the potential risk that enforcement action in one jurisdiction may lead to the relocation of scam centres to other countries.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, how frequently the Government reviews the level of cooperation from host countries in addressing scam centres.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of enforcement action taken by host countries against scam centres.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what metrics are being used to assess the effectiveness of international cooperation in tackling scam centres.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, what international mechanisms are being used to recover funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, which Southeast Asian governments, other than Cambodia’s, have the UK government been working with to combat scam centres.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled UK crackdown on vile scam centres steps up with sanctions on illicit crypto network, published 26 March 2026, which countries in Southeast Asia are hosting the scam centres referenced in the press release.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The UK is working with international partners to tackle the threat of cyber-enabled fraud emanating from scam centres in Cambodia, Myanmar, and elsewhere in Southeast Asia. We have used sanctions to disrupt the networks behind these illicit activities and, where appropriate, we are providing technical assistance to strengthen the capacity of governments and law enforcement to address this issue. Nevertheless, it is important that we continue to go further, which is why strengthening international cooperation is at the heart of the Government's Fraud Strategy for 2026-29, published on 9 March.

We are supportive of actions taken by Governments in Southeast Asia to tackle the threat of scam centres, including most recently in Cambodia. We continue to monitor these efforts and regularly review the latest evidence of the threat of cyber-enabled fraud. This includes assessing emerging trends of displacement into other jurisdictions and our ongoing work to address the issue at a regional level. In regards to funds lost by UK victims of fraud linked to foreign-based scam centres, I refer the Hon. member to the answer given to question 21153 on 18 December 2024.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what estimate he has made of the cost to developers of installing solar panels on new homes under the Future Homes Standard.

Answered by Samantha Dixon - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Government has not estimated a single standalone cost for installing solar PV on new homes under the Future Homes Standard. The published Impact Assessment instead considers solar PV as part of the overall package of measures required to meet the Standard.

The Department intends to monitor impacts on developers following implementation.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to her Department’s press release entitled UK Explanation of Vote on the Declaration of the trafficking of enslaved Africans and racialised chattel enslavement of Africans as the gravest crime, published on 25 March 2026, what discussions took place with international partners prior to the vote about the UK’s position on the resolution.

Answered by Chris Elmore - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

I refer the Hon Member to the press release mentioned in his questions.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to her Department’s press release entitled UK Explanation of Vote on the Declaration of the trafficking of enslaved Africans and racialised chattel enslavement of Africans as the gravest crime, published on 25 March 2026, whether the Government considered voting against the resolution.

Answered by Chris Elmore - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

I refer the Hon Member to the press release mentioned in his questions.

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what alternative technological or operational solutions were considered to address radar interference from offshore wind turbines.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

The new radar systems have met the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) requirements and represent the optimal solution currently available. This option is supported by a robust and well-documented methodology that provides the MOD the confidence that the solution can effectively mitigate the adverse impact of offshore wind turbines on long-range Air Defence radars. The MOD will continue to rigorously assess and implement appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that any offshore wind farm, with the potential to affect Air Defence radar operations, is only approved once these safeguards are firmly in place.

The MOD continues to support the Government’s Clean Power Mission.

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what assessment he has made of the potential risk that the new radar systems may not fully resolve interference issues with offshore wind turbines.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

The new radar systems have met the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) requirements and represent the optimal solution currently available. This option is supported by a robust and well-documented methodology that provides the MOD the confidence that the solution can effectively mitigate the adverse impact of offshore wind turbines on long-range Air Defence radars. The MOD will continue to rigorously assess and implement appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that any offshore wind farm, with the potential to affect Air Defence radar operations, is only approved once these safeguards are firmly in place.

The MOD continues to support the Government’s Clean Power Mission.

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what assessment he has made of the value for money of procuring new radar systems compared to alternative mitigation approaches.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

The new radar systems have met the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) requirements and represent the optimal solution currently available. This option is supported by a robust and well-documented methodology that provides the MOD the confidence that the solution can effectively mitigate the adverse impact of offshore wind turbines on long-range Air Defence radars. The MOD will continue to rigorously assess and implement appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that any offshore wind farm, with the potential to affect Air Defence radar operations, is only approved once these safeguards are firmly in place.

The MOD continues to support the Government’s Clean Power Mission.

Question to the Ministry of Defence:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what assessment he has made of the impact of offshore wind turbines on the performance of existing radar systems prior to this upgrade.

Answered by Luke Pollard - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)

The new radar systems have met the Ministry of Defence's (MOD) requirements and represent the optimal solution currently available. This option is supported by a robust and well-documented methodology that provides the MOD the confidence that the solution can effectively mitigate the adverse impact of offshore wind turbines on long-range Air Defence radars. The MOD will continue to rigorously assess and implement appropriate mitigation measures to ensure that any offshore wind farm, with the potential to affect Air Defence radar operations, is only approved once these safeguards are firmly in place.

The MOD continues to support the Government’s Clean Power Mission.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what estimate he has made of the amount of offshore wind capacity that has been delayed or constrained due to radar-related issues.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

As part of a mission led Government, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Ministry of Defence and have worked together to assess the impact of offshore wind on the UK’s radar systems and the potential for delays to offshore wind deployment. This collaborative effort informed the procurement of the new specially designed air defence radar systems, which will facilitate the co-existence of up to 10 GW of offshore wind capacity, enabling the Government to deliver its clean power mission whilst protecting national security.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment he has made of the role grid-scale energy storage will play in maintaining electricity supply when renewable generation is low.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

Grid-scale storage helps to balance the electricity system at lower cost, maximise the output from intermittent low carbon generation, and provide electricity security.

The Clean Power 2030 Action Plan sets out ambitions for 23-27 GW of grid-scale batteries and 4-6GW of long duration electricity storage (LDES) by 2030. Batteries enable us to manage intraday variability, and LDES technologies enable us to cover multi‑hour to multi‑day energy deficits.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what monitoring arrangements will be put in place to ensure that the radar upgrades deliver the expected increase in offshore wind deployment.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD) will continue to work closely to ensure that proposed wind farms can operate at their design capacity and for which MOD consent has been granted. Any necessary contingency measures are incorporated within the bilateral agreements between the MOD and offshore wind developers. Ongoing collaboration between DESNZ, MOD, and developers, provides robust oversight of the overall delivery of offshore wind capacity, with the radar upgrades forming a key part of the wider enabling infrastructure to facilitate increased offshore wind deployment.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what contingency plans are in place if the radar upgrades do not unlock the full 10 GW of offshore wind capacity anticipated.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD) will continue to work closely to ensure that proposed wind farms can operate at their design capacity and for which MOD consent has been granted. Any necessary contingency measures are incorporated within the bilateral agreements between the MOD and offshore wind developers. Ongoing collaboration between DESNZ, MOD, and developers, provides robust oversight of the overall delivery of offshore wind capacity, with the radar upgrades forming a key part of the wider enabling infrastructure to facilitate increased offshore wind deployment.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of current grid reserve capacity as renewable generation increases.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Government is confident that Great Britain’s electricity system continues to maintain high levels of resilience and strong security of supply. System operators have the tools they need to effectively manage the system in a wide range of scenarios as renewable generation increases.

This includes ensuring sufficient negative and positive reserves on the system to manage changes in generation or demand.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment he has made of the impact of intermittent renewable energy generation on grid stability.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Government is confident that Great Britain’s electricity system continues to maintain high levels of resilience and strong security of supply. System operators have the tools they need to effectively manage the system in a wide range of scenarios as renewable generation increases.

This includes ensuring sufficient negative and positive reserves on the system to manage changes in generation or demand.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what discussions his Department has had with the Ministry of Defence in previous years regarding the impact of offshore wind on radar systems.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

As part of a mission led Government, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Ministry of Defence and have worked together to assess the impact of offshore wind on the UK’s radar systems and the potential for delays to offshore wind deployment. This collaborative effort informed the procurement of the new specially designed air defence radar systems, which will facilitate the co-existence of up to 10 GW of offshore wind capacity, enabling the Government to deliver its clean power mission whilst protecting national security.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of radar-related constraints on previous offshore wind project delays.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

As part of a mission led Government, the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Ministry of Defence and have worked together to assess the impact of offshore wind on the UK’s radar systems and the potential for delays to offshore wind deployment. This collaborative effort informed the procurement of the new specially designed air defence radar systems, which will facilitate the co-existence of up to 10 GW of offshore wind capacity, enabling the Government to deliver its clean power mission whilst protecting national security.

Question to the HM Treasury:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what recent assessment she has made of the impact of fuel duty on a) inflation and b) the cost of living.

Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)

The Government recognises the impact of fuel costs on household budgets and is already taking action to help keep fuel prices down. Since Autumn Budget 2024, the Government’s decisions to freeze fuel duty will save the average motorist around 8 to 11 pence per litre, compared to the plans inherited from the previous government.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) set out the impact of policy measures on inflation in its Autumn Budget 2025 forecast, including the fuel duty freeze extension announced at that Budget. The OBR forecast that this measure will reduce CPI inflation by around 0.13 percentage points in 2026/27.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, with reference to his Department’s press release entitled New radar systems to unlock offshore wind, published on 20th March 2026, what estimate he has made of how much of the 10 GW of offshore wind capacity unlocked has already been contracted but not yet constructed.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and the Ministry of Defence carried out in-depth analysis of the UK’s offshore wind pipeline to understand which offshore wind farms had radar dependencies and would be unlocked by an upgraded air defence radar system that protects both national security and energy security. The 10 GW of offshore wind capacity unlocked consists of relevant projects successful at Contracts for Difference Allocation Round 7 and others that will support the Government’s clean power mission which are at varying stages of development.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the impact of the Future Homes Standard on housing affordability.

Answered by Samantha Dixon - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Future Homes Standard (FHS) has now been published and will come into force on 24 March 2027.

The Department is intending to monitor the impacts of the standard following implementation, including impacts on developers and housing affordability.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment she has made of the contribution of motorcycles to road wear compared with cars.

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

The Department has not made a specific assessment of the contribution of motorcycles to road wear compared with cars.

Guidance for local authorities already highlights the need for maintenance plans to account for changes in circumstances. The main guidance for local highway authorities on asset management is the Code of Practice for Well-Managed Highways Infrastructure, published by the UK Roads Leadership Group and funded by the Department for Transport. The guidance sets out a national framework for how local highway authorities should manage their networks using a risk-based, evidence-led approach, taking account of current and expected highways usage. The Department is currently reviewing the Code of Practice, including to ensure it considers the implications of different vehicle types, their increasing weights, and traffic composition on road maintenance. An updated version will be published by the end of this year.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the longest recorded waiting time for a container awaiting inspection was at UK ports in the last 12 months.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of risk-based targeting in identifying non-compliant or high-risk shipments.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what targets have been set for improving the speed and accuracy of container inspections over the next three years.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department plans to increase the proportion of containers inspected.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to reduce the time taken to inspect shipping containers at ports while maintaining accuracy.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of whether current staffing levels are sufficient to maintain effective inspection coverage.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what technologies are currently used to support container inspections, including non-intrusive scanning and risk-based targeting systems.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what the most common categories of non-compliance identified during container inspections are.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what criteria are used to determine which containers are selected for inspection.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.

The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:

• the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;
• the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; or
• Border Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.

It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.

Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.

Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.

Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Support for the Salvation Army in Basildon

UN resolutions on slavery reparations

Energy Conservation

100th anniversary of the birth of Her late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II