Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of removing the A47/A1101 Elm Road Junction scheme from the Road Investment Strategy pipeline on the level of road safety, congestion, and economic growth.
Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
As part of development work between 2020 and 2025, all of the proposals within the pipeline of future enhancement schemes listed in the second Road Investment Strategy (RIS2) were assessed against a range of factors, including their affordability, deliverability and value for money. They were also assessed and tested as part of an objective impact analysis against their broader alignment to Government objectives including impacts on road user safety and wider economic growth.
In 2023, improvements to the A47 at the Elm Road Junction were overall assessed as not representing value for money. The decision was therefore taken to remove them from the future Pipeline. National Highways will continue, however, to work closely with the relevant local authorities to consider options for improving the performance of this section of the A47.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if it is his policy to make interim payments to valporate and pelvic mesh victims this calendar year.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government is carefully considering the work done by the Patient Safety Commissioner and her report, which set out recommendations for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh, including options for interim payments.
The Government has deep sympathy for all those affected and recognises the profound impact that these harms have had on individuals and their families.
My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, has been clear that he wants to make meaningful progress during this Parliament, although a decision to provide compensation has not yet been made. We recognise how difficult and disappointing this uncertainty is for those affected, and will ensure that the public is kept informed as soon as any decision on redress is made.
I met with the Patient Safety Commissioner, Dr Henrietta Hughes since I have been in post, and had a very productive discussion about the ongoing health initiatives led by the Department regarding sodium valproate and pelvic mesh. Details of the Government’s work to date are set out in recent letters to the Dr Hughes, which are published on her website.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the response of the Minister for Pensions of 23 March 2026, Official Report, column 95, on the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pension Contributions) Bill, whether her estimate of the proportion of contributions over £2,000 that are from additional rate taxpayers also includes higher rate taxpayers.
Answered by Torsten Bell - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The government is taking a pragmatic, balanced approach by introducing a cap which protects ordinary workers and limits the impact on employers, while ensuring that the system remains fiscally sustainable. 87% of pension contributions made via salary sacrifice above £2,000 are forecast to come from higher and additional rate taxpayers.
The £2,000 cap protects 74% of basic rate taxpayers using salary sacrifice. This means that three quarters of those earning up to £50,270 a year who use salary sacrifice will be unaffected.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what proportion of the £53 million support package to be administered under the Crisis and Resilience Fund for off-gas grid households using heating oil will be allocated to Norfolk.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Of the £53 million of funding to support low-income households reliant on oil for heating, £27 million has been allocated to England and will be delivered via the Crisis and Resilience Fund. This is in addition to £842 million a year that has already been committed through the Crisis and Resilience Fund at Spending Review 2025, which all unitary and upper tier authorities in England will receive to support vulnerable and low-income households facing financial shocks, including rising essential costs such as energy.
Norfolk has been allocated £3,055,625 to distribute to households the local authority considers most in need. Allocations have been published on gov.uk (Crisis and Resilience fund to support low-income heating oil households).
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what her proposed timeline is for the implementation of Biodiversity Net Gain requirements for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Government has confirmed that Biodiversity Net Gain will apply to Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. A full consultation response and implementation timeline is expected to be published shortly.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to the answer of the Minister for Care in response to the hon. Member for Bridgwater of 24 February 2026, Official Report, column 169 on Access to NHS Dental Service, if his Department will provide constituency level data on access to NHS dental services for North West Norfolk constituency.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the Hon. Member to the answer I gave on 24 March 2026 to Question 121871.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what guidance has his department given to local authorities on making payments to households with Fuel Oil costs through the Crisis Resilience Fund.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Support for vulnerable households affected by rising oil-heating costs will be treated as Crisis Payments under the Crisis and Resilience Fund. In line with scheme guidance published on 13 January 2026, local authorities have flexibility to determine eligibility for these payments. Local authorities have been reminded of this through departmental communications and supplementary materials have been issued to local authorities to provide further support. The Department is also engaging directly with local authorities receiving the additional oil-heating funding through a dedicated call to clarify delivery expectations, reporting requirements, and approaches to providing assistance and we will review future engagement in line with local authority capacity and needs.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of support available to households using heating oil, in the context of rising global oil prices linked to the conflict in Iran.
Answered by James Murray - Chief Secretary to the Treasury
The government has acted quickly to provide £53m in timely, targeted support to vulnerable households, struggling with the rising price of heating oil, predominantly in rural communities.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what estimate she has made of the impact on Exchequer revenues of high net worth individuals leaving the UK in each year since 2024.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
There is no single agreed definition of a high net worth individual, and taxpayers are not always required to inform HM Revenue and Customs when they leave the UK. Some individuals may submit a P85 after leaving the UK if they are seeking a repayment of income tax, but this is not required in all cases.
Taxpayers within Self Assessment can indicate that they have become non‑resident. Self Assessment tax returns for the 2025–26 tax year are not due until 31 January 2027.
The reforms to the tax treatment of non-domiciled individuals have been specifically designed to make the UK competitive, with a modern, simple tax regime that is also fair. The introduction of a residence-based tax system is expected to raise £39.5bn by 2030-31 (as costed by the OBR last autumn), and the OBR have said that there is no firm evidence to change the estimated impact of the reforms on migration. As set out at Budget 2025, the Chancellor has been clear that she will continue to assess the regime to ensure it strikes the right balance, including on competitiveness.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what engagement her Department has had with (a) the British Ports Association, (b) individual port operators and (c) river and canal authorities regarding the proposal to remove landfill tax exemptions relevant to dredging and port maintenance.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government recognises the vital role that the ports sector plays in supporting the government’s objectives on transport and infrastructure. At the Budget, the Government announced it would legislate to remove the Landfill Tax exemption for stabilisers used in dredged material from April 2027.
This decision followed a consultation on reforms to Landfill Tax during which the government engaged with a range of stakeholders from key sectors. This decision will not prevent the use of stabilisers, but it will encourage businesses to limit their use to what is necessary.
The Government does not expect the change to have a significant impact on flood risk management as most material removed during routine waterway maintenance of rivers and canals is reused locally and deposited adjacent to the channel, avoiding the need for disposal at landfill sites.