Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, pursuant to the Answer of 18 March 2025 to Question 37979 on Natural Gas: Imports, what the minimum safety criteria are with which a shale gas company must comply when plugging an unused well; and who monitors compliance with safety standards.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Heath and Safety Executive and the North Sea Transition Authority are the relevant regulators for onshore shale gas extraction. They regulate compliance with the criteria set for plugging and abandoning wells at the end of their useful life.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether he has had discussions with the Secretary of State for Defence on the potential impact of putting the UK’s shale gas wells permanently beyond use on their policies; and whether he has put contingency plans in place to replace gas imports in the event of overseas supplies being (a) reduced and (b) cut off during an international conflict.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The UK has a secure and diverse energy system. Over the past three years the market has successfully delivered sufficient supplies amidst a period characterised by high energy prices and uncertainties caused by Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, and conflict in the Middle East. The National Emergency Plan for Downstream Gas and Electricity also sets out the arrangements for the safe and effective management of downstream gas or electricity disruption.
Decisions on whether to abandon wells are ultimately a matter for the company. Hydrocarbon wells must be safely plugged and abandoned when they are no longer in use.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent assessment he has made of the willingness of the US administration to (a) consult with and (b) include in peace negotiations representatives of (i) the UK, (ii) France and (iii) other allied NATO member states.
Answered by Stephen Doughty - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We share the US administration's desire to bring this war to an end. As the Prime Minister has said, we warmly welcome the agreement reached between the US and Ukraine in Saudi Arabia on 11 March.
We are regularly engaging with the US, together with other international partners, to drive progress towards a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. The Foreign Secretary has been discussing this further with G7 partners at the Foreign Ministers' meeting.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what recent estimate his Department has made of the (a) volume and (b) proportion of liquefied natural gas imported from the United States derived from shale gas in each of the last three years; and whether emissions created by the (i) extraction, (ii) liquefaction and (iii) transportation to the UK of that gas exceed the emissions which would be created by extracting an equivalent volume of shale gas in the UK.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
Data on gas import origins (including imports of liquified natural gas (LNG) from the US) is published each month in Energy Trends table 4.4. Further disaggregation of US LNG by method of extraction is not collected or available.
The UK has no active commercial shale gas production and hence no emissions data from production to allow a comparison with emissions from imported gas.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if he will make an assessment with the Secretary of State for Defence of the potential merits of appointing a cross-departmental co-ordination unit to oversee efforts to (a) liaise with other countries on initiatives to support Ukraine and (b) maximise (i) efficiency and (ii) productivity in supplying (A) weapons and (B) ammunition to the Ukrainian armed forces.
Answered by Stephen Doughty - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
In September 2024, the Government announced a new joint Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office and Ministry of Defence Ukraine Unit, led by the Foreign Secretary and Defence Secretary. This Unit integrates expertise across the two departments and helps ensure a joined-up approach to international engagement, in support of the Government's efforts to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position. The two departments are working seamlessly together to maximise the impact of UK defence support, ensure that Ukraine gets the military equipment it needs to resist Russian aggression; to deny the Kremlin the resources it needs to sustain its illegal war; and to build a coalition of countries willing and able to help ensure Ukraine's future security.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of (a) Russian advocacy of and (b) US support for holding elections in Ukraine as part of any agreement to cease fighting on the risk of (i) installing a pro-Russian government in Kiev and (ii) facilitating Russian control of the entirety of the country.
Answered by Stephen Doughty - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
It is for Ukraine to decide when and how to hold elections. On 19 February, the Prime Minister spoke to President Zelenskyy and reiterated his ongoing support and recognition of him as Ukraine's democratically elected leader. Ukraine's laws are clear that it cannot hold elections during martial law. Martial law continues to be in place due to Russia's ongoing war of aggression. Ukraine has a strong record of free and fair elections, and we are supporting Ukraine to hold them when it is appropriate to do so. We have been clear about the threat of Russian interference in the region and have been a long-standing partner in countering the threat from Russian disinformation.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of establishing a single independent inquiry into the (a) effectiveness of the Prevent programme and (b) adequacy of the handling of the cases involving (i) Axel Rudakubana and (ii) Ali Harbi Ali.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)
Significant improvements have been made to Prevent over the last few years and a further package of work to strengthen Prevent was announced by the Home Secretary in December 2024. New reforms include the creation for the first time of an independent Prevent Commissioner role. This dedicated permanent oversight function will provide continuous independent scrutiny of Prevent legislation, policy and delivery to maximise Prevent’s effectiveness. To begin this work swiftly, Lord David Anderson KC was announced as the interim Commissioner on 21 January.
In relation to the cases raised by the Rt Hon member, we have published the Prevent Learning Reviews into each case and tasked Lord Anderson with conducting a rapid review of both cases. Lord Anderson will identify whether there is further learning regarding the specific handling of each case; examine improvements made to Prevent since each case and determine whether they have sufficiently strengthened the Prevent system; and identify any remaining gaps or shortcomings that require further improvement. This review will be published and swift action will be taken to implement the findings.
The Home Secretary has already announced a public inquiry into the Southport attack. We are moving swiftly to set up the inquiry and we expect to announce further details later this month, after consultation with families and others most affected.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what (a) restrictions on freedom of movement and (b) other preventative measures are placed on migrants who have (i) arrived in the UK illegally and (ii) been identified as supporters of foreign terrorist organisations.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Home Office)
We have a range of powers at our disposal including prosecution, detention and removal and will not seek to hesitate to use those, as appropriate, against individuals who arrive here illegally and seek to threaten the security of our country.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many legal cases brought against the NHS by mesh-damaged women have been settled (a) in and (b) out of court in each of the past ten years.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS Resolution (NHSR) manages clinical negligence and other claims against the National Health Service in England, and while the information is not available in the format requested, they have provided the data below. This information only covers England and not the rest of the United Kingdom, and NHSR has interpreted ‘in court’ as being where the court proceedings have been served, rather than where a case has gone to trial.
Claims notified and open are not guaranteed to be settled in the same year and can take many years to be concluded. Claims notified in any given year will often relate to incidents that have occurred many years prior. Claims closed and settled in one year will often relate to claims notified in different years. Many of the claims notified will have been repudiated and settled without damages paid.
It is also possible that the same claim may appear more than once in a dataset, across different year groups, for example, where the case has been closed as unsuccessful, challenged, reopened, and closed again at conclusion.
The following table shows the number of clinical claims and incidents received between the financial years 2014/15 and 2023/24, where the claim has been identified as a vaginal mesh claim:
Year of notification | Number of claims |
2014/15 | 5 |
2015/16 | 12 |
2016/17 | 15 |
2017/18 | 54 |
2018/19 | 70 |
2019/20 | 209 |
2020/21 | 396 |
2021/22 | 226 |
2022/23 | 166 |
2023/24 | 99 |
Total | 1,252 |
Source: NHSR
In addition, the following table shows the number of clinical claims settled between the financial years 2015/16 and 2023/24 with a damages payment, where the claim has been identified as a vaginal mesh claim, broken down by litigation status:
Year of settlement and litigation status | Number of claims |
2015/16 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | # |
2016/17 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | # |
2017/18 | 16 |
Litigation | 8 |
No Litigation | 8 |
2018/19 | # |
Litigation | 8 |
No Litigation | # |
2019/20 | # |
Litigation | 11 |
No Litigation | # |
2020/21 | 32 |
Litigation | 22 |
No Litigation | 10 |
2021/22 | 61 |
Litigation | 19 |
No Litigation | 42 |
2022/23 | 116 |
Litigation | 27 |
No Litigation | 89 |
2023/24 | 101 |
Litigation | 22 |
No Litigation | 79 |
Total | 356 |
Source: NHSR
Finally, the following table shows the number of clinical claims settled between the financial years 2015/16 and 2023/24 with no damages paid, where the claim has been identified as a vaginal mesh claim, broken down by litigation status:
Year of settlement and litigation status | Number of claims |
2015/16 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | 8 |
2016/17 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | 6 |
2017/18 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | 7 |
2018/19 | 43 |
Litigation | 5 |
No Litigation | 38 |
2019/20 | # |
Litigation | # |
No Litigation | 43 |
2020/21 | 90 |
Litigation | 6 |
No Litigation | 84 |
2021/22 | 167 |
Litigation | 64 |
No Litigation | 103 |
2022/23 | 179 |
Litigation | 28 |
No Litigation | 151 |
2023/24 | 120 |
Litigation | 10 |
No Litigation | 110 |
Total | 678 |
Source: NHSR
Notes: NHSR has supressed low figures as NHSR believe that disclosure of information to a member of the public would contravene one or more of the data protection principles. In some instances, for low numbers of claims, namely fewer than 5, in each category, the likelihood exists that individuals who are the subject of this information may be identified. As this information is sensitive personal data, NHSR believes it has a greater responsibility to protect those individuals’ identities, as disclosure could potentially cause damage and/or distress to those involved. Due to small numbers in the tables, NHSR has used a ‘#’ symbol in the relevant field.
Asked by: Julian Lewis (Conservative - New Forest East)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to the Answer of 27 February 2025 to Question 32906 on Government Department: Telephone Services, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the removal of dedicated telephone numbers from the List of Ministerial Responsibilities on the ability of hon. Members to speak to staff in Ministers' private offices; and whether the default method of corresponding by email is the only option now available to hon. Members.
Answered by Abena Oppong-Asare - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
Departments publish email addresses as the first means of contacting Ministers. All departments have processes to ensure correspondence via email reaches the intended Minister or team in a rapid manner, meaning there should be no reduction in the ability of MPs to contact Ministers' private offices. MPs may, in any such email correspondence, request a phone call with a departmental official or a member of the Minister's private office.