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

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether her Department has made a recent assessment of the extent to which the functions of (a) national parks, (b) Natural England, (c) the Environment Agency and (d) Forestry England are (i) clearly delineated, (ii) complementary and (iii) overlapping; and whether she has made an assessment of the potential merits of reducing the number of these bodies.

Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)

The Government is conducting a full review of all Arm’s Length Bodies. This review is ongoing, and the outcomes will be published in due course.

However, as National Parks are not classified as Arm’s Length Bodies, they are not included in the review.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on what evidential basis the minimum age for free covid-19 inoculations to be offered by the NHS, other than for people with particular vulnerabilities, was set at 75; and what information his Department holds on (a) the number of deaths there have been from covid-19 in (i) vaccinated and (ii) unvaccinated age groups below 75 and (b) the likelihood of (A) vaccinated and (B) unvaccinated people aged between 50 and 75 of contracting a long-Covid infection in the last 12 months.

Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Government is committed to protecting those most vulnerable to COVID-19 through vaccination, as guided by the independent Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI).

The primary aim of the national COVID-19 vaccination programme remains the prevention of serious illness, resulting in hospitalisations and deaths, arising from COVID-19. Population immunity to COVID-19 has been increasing due to a combination of naturally acquired immunity following recovery from infection and vaccine-derived immunity. COVID-19 is now a relatively mild disease for most people, though it can still be unpleasant, with rates of hospitalisation and death from COVID-19 having reduced significantly since COVID-19 first emerged.

The focus of the JCVI advised programme has therefore moved towards targeted vaccination of the two groups who continue to be at higher risk of serious disease, including mortality. These are the oldest adults and individuals who are immunosuppressed.

On 13 November 2024, the JCVI published advice on who should be offered vaccination in autumn 2025, and on 26 June 2025, the Government accepted the JCVI’s advice. The JCVI’s advice is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-in-2025-and-spring-2026-jcvi-advice/jcvi-statement-on-covid-19-vaccination-in-2025-and-spring-2026

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) continues to monitor COVID-19 through a variety of indicators and surveillance systems. Data over the last 12 months is not available by vaccination status. Information regarding the number of deaths from COVID-19 is available on the UKHSA data dashboard, at the following link:

https://ukhsa-dashboard.data.gov.uk/respiratory-viruses/covid-19#deaths

The UKHSA does not hold information regarding the likelihood of vaccinated and unvaccinated people aged between 50 and 75 years old contracting a long-covid infection.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether the British Embassy in Beijing has been affected by intermittent water supplies; and whether that Embassy has experienced similar issues that have affected its operations.

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

We do not recognise those reports.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what recent representations he has received from ENT UK on the decision by NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board to refuse all future referrals for (a) septoplasty and (b) other septal surgery, apart from exceptional cases; and what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of this decision on the quality of life of people living with a structural nasal obstruction.

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

The Department has received correspondence about the NHS Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board’s (ICB) recent decision from ENT UK along with the British Rhinological Society, the Association of Otolaryngologists in Training, the British Society for Facial Plastic Surgery, and the patient charities SmellTaste and Sinus UK.

ICBs commission local services as part of their role in managing and improving healthcare for their populations. ICBs commission services to meet identified local needs and are responsible for planning how services will be delivered in their area. This includes making decisions about the routine procedures that are offered, based on evidence for how clinically effective they are. This means that nine clinical procedures, which have been available only in specific circumstances, will no longer be routinely funded.

Given this is an ICB policy, it would be their responsibility to undertake any impact assessments. The Clinical Professional Leadership Group leading on this clinical policy used expert guidance provided by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and a national evidence-based interventions programme. This decision reflects the group’s commitment to prioritising interventions that deliver the greatest equity and overall benefit to the health needs of the entire population. All patients with a nasal blockage and/or deformity will be offered alternative advice and treatment, and only in exceptional cases can clinicians apply for funding for these procedures if the treatment is felt to be appropriate.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will publish the number of hotels that (a) were used and (b) will be used to house asylum seekers in New Forest East constituency in 2025.

Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Home Office has been clear that the use of hotels is a temporary and short-term measure to ensure we meet our statutory obligation to accommodate destitute asylum seekers, while we tackle the systemic challenges due to the previous government’s decisions.

Accommodation data is published quarterly, on the number of supported asylum seekers in accommodation, including hotels which can be found within the Asy_D11 tab for our most recent statistics release. The data can also be broken down by local authority. Immigration system statistics data tables - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)(opens in a new tab)

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what recent assessment his Department has made of the reasons for the difference in availability of Omaveloxolone (Skyclarys) as a treatment for Friedrich's ataxia in (a) Scotland and (b) England and Wales; and if he will make it his policy to require the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence to set out the reasons for which new drugs that (i) have been approved by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and (ii) are available in Scotland are not available in England and Wales.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Department has made no assessment of the reasons for the difference in the availability of omaveloxolone (Skyclarys) as a treatment for Friedrich's ataxia in Scotland, England, and Wales.

Decisions on the availability of medicines are taken by the respective health authorities in each nation of the United Kingdom. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is responsible for making recommendations on the use of new medicines in England, while Scotland has its own processes through the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC).

NICE publishes the reasons for its decisions on its website, and the Department has no plans to require NICE to set out the reasons for differences between its recommendations and the SMC’s. NICE was unable to make a recommendation on the use of omaveloxolone for treating Friedreich's ataxia in people aged 16 years old and over because the manufacturing company, Biogen, withdrew its evidence submission. NICE will review this decision if Biogen decides to make a new submission.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the Answer of 30 October 2025 to Question 83220 on Army: Public Records, with regards to the criteria of (a) national security, (b) international relations and (c) sensitive personal data, under which of them is Security Service file PF 44288 on Major General JFC Fuller being withheld.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)

Although it is Government policy to neither confirm nor deny whether an individual has been subject to investigation by the Security Service, an exception to this policy allows the Security Service to release files to The National Archives that are at least 50 years old, if to do so would not damage national security. The Security Service holds no file for Gen. J.F.C. Fuller that falls within this category.

Crohn’s and Colitis Awareness Week 2025

As You Like It Club for the blind and partially sighted

RAF Photographic Reconnaissance Units

International Men’s Day and prostate cancer

Future of the BBC

Actions of Samir Zitouni on 1 November 2025