Kate Osamor

An evaluation of the effectiveness of the voucher scheme, including analysis of scheme outcomes and evidence collected from scheme applicants and other stakeholders, is being undertaken by an independent research organisation. The evaluation includes an assessment of the effect of the Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme on jobs, with findings available in Summer 2023.

There were 9 homes retrofitted in Edmonton through the Local Authority Delivery Scheme. This data is available in Table 13 of the December HULA Statistics release.

Information on the number of homes retrofitted by parliamentary constituency through the Green Homes Grant Voucher Scheme can be found in Table 4.4 accompanying the latest release.

The Government is committed to improving the energy performance of homes across the country, including Edmonton.

The Government is investing £6.6 billion in decarbonising heat and energy efficiency measures. In addition, the Energy Company Obligation Scheme is in its fourth iteration which will run until 2026 with a value of £4 billion. ECO + has also been announced, worth £1 billion and will run from Spring 2023 to March 2026.

£6 billion of additional Government funding towards supporting energy efficiency improvements will be made available from 2025 to 2028

Grant funding for renewable innovation or community-based renewable schemes is open for both local authorities and private investors to bid on. The Contract for Difference scheme, the Government’s main mechanism for supporting low carbon generation, is awarded through a competitive process, ensuring that the most cost-effective projects are supported regardless of their location.

The 2019 Conservative Manifesto committed to a £3.8bn Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund (SHDF) over a 10-year period. The SHDF Demonstrator and Wave 1 awarded a combined total of around £240m of grant funding to Local Authorities, with data held on local authority-led projects rather than at a constituency level. The SHDF Wave 2.1 competition, which closed on 18th November 2022, will allocate up to £800m of grant funding, with successful projects likely to be notified in March 2023.

Businesses in Edmonton will have benefitted from the Government’s reversal of the National Insurance rise, which will save SMEs approximately £4,200 on average, cut to fuel duty for 12 months and the Energy Bill Relief Scheme, to protect small businesses from high energy costs over the winter. In addition, the Recovery Loan Scheme is available to SMEs across the UK.

Our Recovery Loan Scheme offers loans to help small businesses access the finance, in addition to existing support through our Help to Grow schemes all supporting businesses to grow, invest and thrive.

332 SMEs in Edmonton have received Start Up Loans to the value of £2,407,357 as of November 2022.

The Government recognises the impact rising prices are having on businesses, including those in Edmonton and is engaging with businesses across the UK to understand these challenges and explore ways to mitigate them.

The Government has reversed the National Insurance rise, saving SMEs £4,200 on average; cut fuel duty for 12 months; raised the Employment Allowance to £5,000 and introduced the Energy Bill Relief Scheme which is shielding businesses across the country from soaring energy prices, saving some around half of their wholesale energy costs.

We have also announced £13.6 billion of support for businesses over the next five years, reducing the burden of business rates for SMEs.

The 2019 Conservative Manifesto committed to a £3.8bn Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund (SHDF) over a 10-year period. The SHDF Demonstrator and Wave 1 awarded a combined total of around £240m of grant funding to Local Authorities, with data held on local authority-led projects rather than at a constituency level. The SHDF Wave 2.1 competition, which closed on 18th November 2022, will allocate up to £800m of grant funding, with successful projects likely to be notified in March 2023.

The carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research remains necessary to protect humans and the wider environment. The Government's current approach is to ensure that the UK has a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards and to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs). This is achieved primarily through funding from UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) for the National Centre for the 3Rs (NC3Rs). Since the NC3Rs was launched in 2004, it has committed £100 million in research to develop 3Rs technologies.

My Rt. Hon. Friend the Secretary of State has regular conversations with Cabinet colleagues on a range of issues.

The Energy Bill Relief Scheme (EBRS) provides a price reduction to ensure that all eligible businesses and other non-domestic customers. The price reduction will run initially for 6 months covering energy use from 1 October 2022 until 31 March 2023. Non-domestic customers such as postmasters and sub-postmasters do not need to take action or apply to the scheme – support will automatically be applied to eligible bills.

An HM Treasury-led review of the EBRS will determine support for non-domestic energy consumers, excluding public sector organisations, beyond 31 March 2023. The Government has published terms of reference for the review, with the findings to be published by 31 December 2022.

The Heat and Buildings Strategy sets out how the Government will decarbonise homes, commercial, industrial, and public sector buildings, as part a path to achieving the Government’s net zero commitment by 2050.

Alongside the strategy, the Government announced £3.9 billion of new funding for decarbonising heat and buildings. This will fund the next three years of investment through schemes including the Home Upgrade Grant scheme and the Boiler Upgrade Scheme. This takes the financial commitment to decarbonising buildings in this Parliament to £6.6billion.

The Government is prioritising the most vulnerable in society for support and is committed to achieving its statutory fuel poverty target: that as many fuel poverty households as reasonably practicable achieve a minimum energy efficiency rating of a Band C by 2030’.

In addition, the Government is working with lenders to catalyse the market for green finance. This is a priority for Government to help support homeowners not eligible for grants with the upfront costs of improvement.

Throughout the pandemic, the Government has recognised the need to provide businesses, workers and the public with as much notice as possible of any changes to COVID-19 measures.

We published our Autumn and Winter plan for managing COVID-19 last September, including details of Plan B measures should they be required. Plan B measures are now in place to slow the spread of the virus and ease pressure on the NHS, whilst minimising the impact on lives and livelihoods. My Rt. Hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced on 5 January that Plan B will be in place for another 3 weeks, with a further review before the regulations expire on 26 January. We will provide businesses and the public with as much notice as possible of any changes to COVID-19 measures.

Throughout the pandemic, the Government has recognised the need to provide businesses, workers and the public with as much notice as possible of any changes to COVID-19 restrictions.

We published our Autumn and Winter plan for managing COVID-19 last September, including details of Plan B measures should they be required. Plan B measures are now in place to slow the spread of the virus and ease pressure on the NHS, while minimising the impact on lives and livelihoods. My Rt. Hon. Friend the Prime Minister announced on 5 January that they will be in place for another 3 weeks, with a further review before the regulations expire on 26 January. We will provide businesses and the public with as much notice as possible of any changes to COVID-19 restrictions.

Despite the unprecedented package of support provided by this Government, some employers will need to offer different terms and conditions to their employees in order to ensure the sustainability of their business and avoid redundancies.

However, using threats about firing and re-hiring as a negotiating tactic is unacceptable. In addition, if the employer changes any of the terms without the employee’s agreement, the employee may be entitled to seek legal redress. Laws are in place to ensure that there is fair procedure in redundancy and dismissal matters as well as contractual terms and conditions cannot discriminate unlawfully.

The Department has engaged Acas to look into fire and rehire practises and they are talking to business and employee representatives, to gather evidence of how fire and rehire has been used.

There is clearly a risk of greater transmission in close proximity services. That is why we have had to phase their introduction. We had to make difficult choices to keep the R rate below 1.

We’ve now provided close contact services like Soft Tissue Therapists in England, except Leicester, with the certainty they need to reopen from Monday 13 July, subject to them following the COVID-secure guidelines.

Linear TV broadcasting is facing increasing and unprecedented pressure from competition for viewers from high spending streaming giants, and there is growing pressure on TV advertising revenues too. Ofcom have recognised these challenges in their latest recommendations to the government on the future of public service media, published on 15 July.

Channel 4 is uniquely constrained in its ability to meet these challenges while it remains under public ownership. In comparison to other public service broadcasters, its access to capital is highly constrained. By virtue of the publisher-broadcaster restriction and borrowing restrictions placed upon it, its ability to diversify its income streams is also limited. These factors restrict Channel 4’s ability to respond to changing market dynamics now and into the future.

Recognising this challenge, we are looking at reform to protect Channel 4's long term future so it can continue to be a valued public service broadcaster, serving audiences with great public service content for years to come.

We have consulted on the best model to ensure Channel 4’s sustainability. We are analysing all the responses to ensure evidence feeds into the government’s policy-making and final decision.

As set out in our consultation document, we are seeking views on the best model to ensure Channel 4’s sustainability in an ever-changing and competitive landscape, and we continue to remain open to all options to address this. We are currently analysing the views and evidence we have received from a broad range of stakeholders to inform the government’s policy-making and final decision.

The government appreciates the significant impact that the collapse of the novel gambling product Football Index had on former customers. Administration proceedings for BetIndex, the company which operated Football Index, are continuing. These are looking at the assets and liabilities of the operator and what is owed to customers. It is likely that this process will result in some amounts being reimbursed to creditors.

The Gambling Commission has revoked BetIndex’s operating licence and the Personal Management Licences held by senior members of the company have been surrendered. The Commission has also referred the company to the Insolvency Service to ask that they consider whether the actions of the directors prior to administration breached insolvency or fraud laws.

This Government recognises the importance of the UK’s thriving cultural industries, and that is why it pushed for ambitious arrangements to make it easier for performers and artists to perform across Europe as part of the negotiations on our future relationship with the EU.

This Government proposed to the EU that musicians, and their technical staff, be added to the list of permitted activities for short-term business visitors in the entry and temporary stay chapter of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. This would have allowed musicians and their staff to travel and perform in the EU more easily, without needing work-permits. These proposals were rejected by the EU.

As with legal text shared in confidence with trading partners, elaborating on discussions between departments related to the development of legal text for trade agreements would not be appropriate as these discussions took place in confidence.

The Government recognises the importance of international touring for UK cultural and creative practitioners, and their support staff.

We know that while leaving the EU will bring changes and new processes to touring and working in the EU, it will also bring new opportunities.

Leaving the EU has always meant that there would be changes to how practitioners operate in the EU. DCMS has engaged with the sector extensively throughout negotiations and since the announcement of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement to understand the diverse circumstances of companies, organisations and individual practitioners and how they may need to adapt as they plan activity across the European Union.

Going forward we will continue to work closely with the sector, including with representative organisations, to assess the impact and to ensure businesses and individuals have the advice and guidance they need to meet new requirements. This includes the creation of a DCMS-led working group to bring together sector leads and other government departments to address technical questions from the sector in more detail.

We continue to support providers through the COVID-19 outbreak, and the testing programme that has been successfully stood up for colleges and secondary schools will continue to be used to support teachers, vulnerable children and children of critical workers and to prepare for wider re-opening.

We will continue to pay grant-funded providers their scheduled monthly profiled payments for 2020/21 academic year. We are currently reviewing the end of year grant funded AEB reconciliation position for 2020 to 2021 in recognition of the difficulties and uncertainties many providers are facing. We will communicate any changes to the published arrangements through our Update publication in the coming weeks.

Where applicable, providers were able to apply to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) Post 16 and ESFA provider relief schemes for support.

For colleges in significant financial difficulties, the existing support arrangements remain in place, including short-term emergency funding.

During the COVID-19 outbreak, we have put in place a package of support to help the further education (FE) sector build their capacity to deliver digitally. This includes flexibilities to secure devices and connectivity through the 16-19 bursary funding and through changes to the adult education budget funding rules for the 2020/21 academic year.

In order to support colleges to respond to current challenge, including developing new ways of working, we adapted the College Collaboration Fund. This will see investment in new high-quality digital curriculum content, including funding for 7 projects that will develop hundreds of hours of new digital content for a wide range of vocational subjects, as well as PSHE and English and Maths.

We are also investing in FE practitioner online teaching skills through funding the Education and Training Foundation to support teachers to develop their online teaching skills, and we recently announced 80 new grants of £1,000 to FE providers across England to provide additional training and support for mentors and coaches specialising in assisting teachers with remote education.

We continue to support providers through the COVID-19 outbreak, and the testing programme that has been successfully stood up for colleges and secondary schools will continue to be used to support teachers, vulnerable children and children of critical workers and to prepare for wider re-opening.

We will continue to pay grant-funded providers their scheduled monthly profiled payments for 2020/21 academic year. We are currently reviewing the end of year grant funded AEB reconciliation position for 2020 to 2021 in recognition of the difficulties and uncertainties many providers are facing. We will communicate any changes to the published arrangements through our Update publication in the coming weeks.

Where applicable, providers were able to apply to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) Post 16 and ESFA provider relief schemes for support.

For colleges in significant financial difficulties, the existing support arrangements remain in place, including short-term emergency funding.

During the COVID-19 outbreak, we have put in place a package of support to help the further education (FE) sector build their capacity to deliver digitally. This includes flexibilities to secure devices and connectivity through the 16-19 bursary funding and through changes to the adult education budget funding rules for the 2020/21 academic year.

In order to support colleges to respond to current challenge, including developing new ways of working, we adapted the College Collaboration Fund. This will see investment in new high-quality digital curriculum content, including funding for 7 projects that will develop hundreds of hours of new digital content for a wide range of vocational subjects, as well as PSHE and English and Maths.

We are also investing in FE practitioner online teaching skills through funding the Education and Training Foundation to support teachers to develop their online teaching skills, and we recently announced 80 new grants of £1,000 to FE providers across England to provide additional training and support for mentors and coaches specialising in assisting teachers with remote education.

We continue to support providers through the COVID-19 outbreak, and the testing programme that has been successfully stood up for colleges and secondary schools will continue to be used to support teachers, vulnerable children and children of critical workers and to prepare for wider re-opening.

We will continue to pay grant-funded providers their scheduled monthly profiled payments for 2020/21 academic year. We are currently reviewing the end of year grant funded AEB reconciliation position for 2020 to 2021 in recognition of the difficulties and uncertainties many providers are facing. We will communicate any changes to the published arrangements through our Update publication in the coming weeks.

Where applicable, providers were able to apply to the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) Post 16 and ESFA provider relief schemes for support.

For colleges in significant financial difficulties, the existing support arrangements remain in place, including short-term emergency funding.

During the COVID-19 outbreak, we have put in place a package of support to help the further education (FE) sector build their capacity to deliver digitally. This includes flexibilities to secure devices and connectivity through the 16-19 bursary funding and through changes to the adult education budget funding rules for the 2020/21 academic year.

In order to support colleges to respond to current challenge, including developing new ways of working, we adapted the College Collaboration Fund. This will see investment in new high-quality digital curriculum content, including funding for 7 projects that will develop hundreds of hours of new digital content for a wide range of vocational subjects, as well as PSHE and English and Maths.

We are also investing in FE practitioner online teaching skills through funding the Education and Training Foundation to support teachers to develop their online teaching skills, and we recently announced 80 new grants of £1,000 to FE providers across England to provide additional training and support for mentors and coaches specialising in assisting teachers with remote education.

As we address the challenges presented by COVID-19 and prepare to seize the opportunities offered up by leaving the European Union, it is vital that we support adults, including those working in sectors directly affected by COVID-19, to attain the skills that will be needed in the economy of the future.

Starting this year, the Government is investing £2.5 billion (£3 billion when including Barnett funding for devolved administrations) in the national skills fund. This is a significant investment and has the potential to deliver new opportunities to generations of adults who may have been previously left behind.

My right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced £375 million for the national skills fund at the Spending Review in November 2020. This includes £95 million funding for a new level 3 adult offer and £43 million for skills bootcamps. Investment in skills through the national skills fund is vital, ensuring adults have the opportunity to progress into higher wage employment and to support those who need to retrain at different points throughout their lives.

From April 2021, we will be supporting any adult aged 24 and over who wants to achieve their first full Level 3 qualification – equivalent to two A-Levels, or a technical certificate or diploma – to access nearly 400 fully funded courses.

Complementing the Level 3 adult offer, the skills bootcamps offer free, flexible courses of up to 16 weeks, giving people the opportunity to build up sector-specific skills and fast-track to an interview with a local employer. skills bootcamps have the potential to transform the skills landscape for adults and employers.

The Government plans to consult on the national skills fund in spring 2021 to ensure that we develop a fund that helps adults learn valuable skills and prepares them for the economy of the future.

Through our lifelong loan entitlement, we will also make it easier for adults and young people to study more flexibly. This will allow them to space out their studies across their lifetimes, transfer credits between colleges and universities, and enable more part-time study.

We are also continuing to invest in education and skills training for adults through the adult education budget (AEB) (£1.34 billion in 2020/21). The AEB fully funds or co-funds skills provision for eligible adults aged 19 and above from pre-entry to Level 3, to support adults to gain the skills they need for work, an apprenticeship or further learning.

In April we introduced the skills toolkit, an online platform providing free courses to help individuals build the skills that are most sought after by employers. We have recently expanded the platform so that people can now choose from over 70 courses, covering digital, adult numeracy, employability and work readiness skills, which have been identified as the skills employers need the most. These courses will help people stay in work, or take up new jobs and opportunities.

In July last year the Plan for Jobs was announced by my right hon. Friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which includes incentives for employers to take on new apprentices, including those over 25, and an additional £17 million to increase the number of Sector-based work academy programme placements in 2020/21.

On 26 August, the Department revised its guidance on face coverings in schools following a new statement by the World Health Organisation on 21 August, which advised that “children aged 12 and over should wear face coverings under the same condition as adults, particularly when they cannot guarantee at least a one metre distance from others and there is widespread transmission in the area”. The guidance can be found here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/face-coverings-in-education/face-coverings-in-education.

As the guidance outlines, in areas of national government intervention, face coverings should be worn by staff, visitors and pupils in secondary schools when moving around indoors, such as in corridors in communal areas where social distancing is difficult to maintain. Otherwise, the Government is not recommending that face coverings are necessary in schools. All schools, including primary schools, have the discretion to require the use of face coverings for adults and pupils in year 7 and above in indoor communal areas where social distancing cannot be safely managed, if they believe that it is right in their particular circumstances. Children in primary school do not need to wear a face covering.

During the COVID-19 outbreak we are temporarily extending free school meals eligibility to include some groups who have no recourse to public funds. We do not currently hold estimates for the cost of permanently extending eligibility on this basis.

The Department does not currently collect data regarding the take up of free school meals from children of families who are subject to a no recourse to public funds condition.

The Department has engaged in discussion with Home Office colleagues throughout the policy-making process.

During the COVID-19 outbreak we are temporarily extending free school meals eligibility to include some groups who have no recourse to public funds. We do not currently hold estimates for the cost of permanently extending eligibility on this basis.

The Department does not currently collect data regarding the take up of free school meals from children of families who are subject to a no recourse to public funds condition.

The Department has engaged in discussion with Home Office colleagues throughout the policy-making process.

During the COVID-19 outbreak we are temporarily extending free school meals eligibility to include some groups who have no recourse to public funds. We do not currently hold estimates for the cost of permanently extending eligibility on this basis.

The Department does not currently collect data regarding the take up of free school meals from children of families who are subject to a no recourse to public funds condition.

The Department has engaged in discussion with Home Office colleagues throughout the policy-making process.

During the COVID-19 outbreak we are temporarily extending free school meals eligibility to include some groups who have no recourse to public funds. We do not currently hold estimates for the cost of permanently extending eligibility on this basis.

The Department does not currently collect data regarding the take up of free school meals from children of families who are subject to a no recourse to public funds condition.

The Department has engaged in discussion with Home Office colleagues throughout the policy-making process.

We have temporarily extended our eligibility for free school meals during the COVID-19 outbreak to include children of Zambrano carers, families with leave to remain under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, families receiving section 17 support who also have a no recourse to public funds condition and to families receiving section 4 support.

This extension was implemented urgently and our consultation was limited to other government departments in the time available. No formal consultation was undertaken beyond this.

As a result of the huge efforts everyone has made to adhere to strict social distancing measures, the transmission rate of COVID-19 has decreased and the Government’s five tests have been met. Based on all the evidence, the Department asked primary schools to welcome back children in nursery, reception, year 1 and year 6, alongside priority groups (vulnerable children and children of critical workers), from 1 June. From 15 June, secondary schools can invite year 10 and 12 pupils (years 10 and 11 for alternative provision schools) back into school for some face-to-face support with their teachers, to supplement their remote education, which will remain the predominant mode of education for these pupils this term. Priority groups can continue to attend full-time.

To support schools the Department has published guidance on GOV.UK:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/actions-for-educational-and-childcare-settings-to-prepare-for-wider-opening-from-1-june-2020/actions-for-education-and-childcare-settings-to-prepare-for-wider-opening-from-1-june-2020#year-groups-in-first-phase-of-wider-opening.

The guidance makes clear that we expect all mainstream schools, including independent schools, to follow the same approach.

Both officials and ministers are in frequent contact with the Independent Schools Council about the wider opening of schools.

As both my right hon. Friends, the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer, have made clear, the government will do whatever it takes to support people affected by COVID-19.

Our latest guidance for schools is set out below:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/coronavirus-covid-19-guidance-for-schools-and-other-educational-settings.

Provision for free school meals is ordinarily term time only. However, during the Easter holidays the department met the costs of offering free school meals to eligible pupils not attending school during term time weeks. This was in recognition of the unprecedented levels of disruption and uncertainty for schools during this time. Whether or not such a measure continues to be appropriate in future holiday periods will be confirmed in due course.

These are rapidly developing circumstances. We continue to keep the situation under review and will keep Parliament updated accordingly.

Guidance for schools regarding the temporary provision of free school meals for children from certain groups of families with no recourse to public funds is currently available online here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-free-school-meals-guidance/guidance-for-the-temporary-extension-of-free-school-meals-eligibility-to-nrpf-groups.

We will place the guidance in the Libraries of both Houses.

The Department collects pupil forecasts, existing school capacities, and plans to deliver additional school places from each local authority via the annual school capacity survey which can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-school-capacity.

The Department only collects data at local authority and planning area level, and so do not hold constituency level data. Over 5,000 new school places have been created in Enfield local authority since 2010.

Table 1: Secondary capacity in Enfield since 2010

The statutory duty to provide sufficient school places sits with local authorities. We provide basic need funding for every place that is needed, based on local authorities’ own data on pupil forecasts. They can use this funding to provide places in new schools or through expansions of existing schools, and can work with any school in their local area, including academies and free schools. Enfield has been allocated £122.7 million to provide new school places from 2011-2021.

The Department for Education is encouraging schools, as well as suppliers of goods and services to schools, to reduce their consumption of single-use plastics throughout the supply chain. Further information regarding this can be found at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/schools-challenged-to-go-single-use-plastic-free-by-2022.

We urge schools to consider finding reusable alternatives wherever possible.

As part of the science curriculum, children are taught about the scientific concepts that relate to the environment. At key stage 2, pupils should explore examples of the human impact on environments, which can include the negative impact of litter. This is built upon in key stage 3 chemistry where pupils are taught about the efficacy of recycling.

The Local Adaptation Advisory Panel is an official-level forum in which Defra senior and working-level officials are actively engaged. Defra Ministers do not participate in the group.

The delivery of the Environment Act 2021 statutory targets does not place a specific burden on local authorities but will require a shared endeavour from government, local authorities, business and the individual decisions we all make. Through the Environment Act 2021 we have ensured a robust legal framework to hold current and future governments to account, protecting nature for generations to come.

We continue to engage with local authorities on specific targets and to assess any support they need in their delivery.

Following the Surface Water Flooding in London in summer 2021 it was recognised that basements in London are particularly vulnerable to surface water flooding impacts. The Environment Agency supported the Greater London Authority to provide extra information on flood risk and flood preparedness to people living in basement properties. A leaflet was produced and delivered to 40,000 basement properties in London. The Environment Agency also contributed to London Flood Awareness week in November 2021: London Flood Awareness Week 2021 | London City Hall.

The Environment Agency recommend residents check their flood risk: Check for flooding - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk).

Homes at risk of flooding are urged to sign up to Flood Warnings: What to do in a flood - Check for flooding - GOV.UK (check-for-flooding.service.gov.uk) and weather alerts: UK weather warnings - Met Office.

The Government published the third UK Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA3) in January 2022 which included findings from the ‘Monetary Valuation of Risks and Opportunities in CCRA3’ report which provides a synthesis of existing evidence estimating the economic costs of climate impacts. The CCRA informs decisions taken across the country to adapt to climate change impacts, both for central and local government.

Defra, alongside DLUHC, continue to work with local government partners to better understand climate impacts at a local level and to support their plans to deliver greater climate resilience.

Departments across Government worked to respond to heatwave of 2022, including as part of the UK Health Security Agency’s (UKHSA) Heatwave Plan for England. What we have learned from these events will form a key part of the underpinning evidence for the next CCRA, the development of the UKHSA Single Adverse Weather and Health Plan, and the UK’s third National Adaptation Programme which is due for publication this year.

The Local Government Finance Settlement for 2023/24 makes available up to £59.7 billion for local government in England, an increase in Core Spending Power of up to £5.1 billion or 9.4% in cash terms on 2022/23.

The majority of the funding is un-ringfenced in recognition of local authorities being best placed to understand local priorities.

To assess the amount of funding required for local government ahead of fiscal events, we estimate the additional resource required to fund the expenditure needs of local authorities. Government uses a range of forecasts and indices to estimate demographic and unit cost pressures facing local government. We ensure the assumptions underlying our modelling are robust by holding in-depth financial conversations with local authorities and regular conversations with treasurer societies.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 6 December to PQ 99926.

Antibiotics are an essential part of veterinary medicine. Failing to use antibiotics in animals which need them compromises animal health and welfare. The Government’s position is that we must reduce the unnecessary use of antibiotics in animals while making sure they can still be used when they are truly needed, to reduce antimicrobial resistance. In the UK, the use of antibiotics in food producing animals has reduced by 55% between 2014 and 2021, and in 2021 we recorded the lowest antibiotic use to date.

Defra is a co-signatory with the Department of Health and Social Care of the UK's Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) 5 year National Action Plan (2019-2024) and the UK's 20 year Vision to Contain and Control AMR by 2040. The UK is considered a global leader on AMR.

The UK takes a One Health, holistic approach, working together to control the emergence and spread of resistant bacteria (also known as superbugs), by reducing antibiotic use in humans and animals and limiting the spread of resistant bacteria through the environment. In the UK, the use of antibiotics in food producing animals has reduced by 55% between 2014 and 2021, and in 2021 we recorded the lowest antibiotic use to date. Over the same period, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) have reported an overall trend of decreasing antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from animals.

The UK Government funded the Pathogen Surveillance in Agriculture, Food and the Environment (PATHSAFE) programme last year, which brings together partners to better understand AMR and gather tracking and monitoring data. Over the years the government has supported several stewardship programmes to encourage the responsible use of antibiotics in humans and animals. Defra also coordinated the Annual Health and Welfare Review which is the first step farmers can take on the government's Animal Health and Welfare Pathway introducing a vet visit for farmers on a yearly basis. These programmes aim to reduce the amount of medicine used on endemic diseases in the long term, helping in the fight against superbugs.

Defra does not support the routine or predictable use of antibiotics, including where antibiotics are used to compensate for inadequate farming practices.We have been consistent that the focus of tackling antimicrobial resistance must be on reducing all unnecessary use of antibiotics, because resistance is promoted whenever an antibiotic is used, regardless of the reason.

We have been engaging closely with external partners over the past few months to inform policy development across a range of chemicals issues. This builds on the commitment in the 25 Year Environment Plan to set out our strategy to tackle chemicals of concern. No publication date for a Chemicals Strategy has yet been set.

Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) represent a group of thousands of chemicals, with hundreds used commercially across many sectors of industry and society. There is increasing evidence of the occurrence of PFAS in the environment and, once in the environment, PFAS are persistent. There is also growing concern regarding the risks to human health. Action has already been taken to ban or highly restrict specific PFAS both domestically and internationally, including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). However, PFAS represent a very diverse group of chemicals with a wide range of uses for which safer and more sustainable alternatives are not yet available - making this a very challenging issue to tackle.

Work is underway across government to help us assess levels of PFAS occurring in the environment, their sources and potential risks to inform future policy and regulatory approaches. In the UK REACH Work Programme for 2021-22, Defra asked the EA and HSE to examine the risks posed by PFAS and develop a 'Regulatory Management Options Analysis' (RMOA). The RMOA will be published in early 2023 and will make recommendations for risk management measures, building on the commitment in the 25 Year Environment Plan to tackle chemicals of concern. Defra and the Devolved Administrations will carefully consider its recommendations to inform future PFAS policy.

We are committed to leading efforts to protect the marine environment and counter marine pollution. The UK Marine Strategy Programme of Measures sets out a comprehensive list of actions that HM Government is taking to reduce pollution in the marine environment and move us towards Good Environmental Status in our seas.

Now we have left the EU, the Government is able to explore potential action in relation to animal fur. We are reviewing the evidence gathered both from our Call for Evidence and wider engagement with the fur trade and stakeholders, and a summary of responses will be published soon.

The Government has made clear that the production of foie gras from ducks or geese using force feeding raises serious welfare concerns. We do not allow its production in the UK. We are now able to consider any further steps that could be taken in relation to foie gras that is produced overseas using force feeding practices, such as restrictions on import and sale. We are gathering information and will continue to speak to a range of interested parties about the issues involved. This is in line with the Government's commitment to improving animal welfare standards as set out in the Action Plan for Animal Welfare.

Now we have left the EU, the Government is able to explore potential action in relation to animal fur. We are reviewing the evidence gathered both from our Call for Evidence and wider engagement with the fur trade and stakeholders, and a summary of responses will be published soon.

The Government has made clear that the production of foie gras from ducks or geese using force feeding raises serious welfare concerns. We do not allow its production in the UK. We are now able to consider any further steps that could be taken in relation to foie gras that is produced overseas using force feeding practices, such as restrictions on import and sale. We are gathering information and will continue to speak to a range of interested parties about the issues involved. This is in line with the Government's commitment to improving animal welfare standards as set out in the Action Plan for Animal Welfare.

The Government considers that the best way of addressing the online sale of animals by unlicensed breeders and private individuals is to work closely with the Pet Advertising Advisory Group (PAAG). PAAG was created to combat growing concerns about the irresponsible advertising of pets for sale, rehoming and exchange, including through social media platforms. PAAG has developed a set of Minimum Standards which several of the UK’s largest classified websites have agreed to meet.

In addition my Department maintains a national communications campaign (Petfished) to raise awareness of issues associated with low-welfare and illegal supply of pets. This includes providing clear signposting to where responsible breeders and rehoming centres can be found and encouraging prospective buyers to research the seller thoroughly before they visit and decide to purchase. The campaign provides a list of red flags for buyers to look out for when searching for a pet online.

All dogs and all pet horses, ponies and other equines in England are already required to be microchipped. In December 2021 we announced that we will introduce compulsory microchipping of all owned cats in line with our manifesto commitment. We plan to introduce the necessary legislation in 2022. We have no plans to introduce compulsory microchipping of other pets.

The neutering of pets is a decision for owners and we have no plans to make this mandatory. We support animal welfare charities and rehoming establishments in their work to encourage people to neuter their cats and dogs when they are not intended for breeding purposes. Owners should consult their vets for advice about neutering and breeding control.

This is a devolved matter and this response relates to the situation applying in England.

The Animal Welfare (Kept Animals) Bill was introduced in Parliament on 8 June and completed committee on 18 November. The Bill allows us to protect the welfare of pets by introducing restrictions to crack down on the low welfare movements of pets into Great Britain and includes powers to introduce new restrictions on pet travel and the commercial import of pets on welfare grounds, via secondary legislation.

In August 2021, the Government launched an eight-week consultation on our proposed restrictions to the commercial and non-commercial movement of pets, including rescue pets, into Great Britain. This included proposals to ban the commercial and non-commercial movement into Great Britain of puppies under the age of six months, heavily pregnant dogs and dogs which have been subjected to low welfare practices such as ear cropping or tail docking. We are currently analysing the responses to the consultation and will publish a summary response in due course. This will allow us to take onboard the views of the public and interested groups on puppy smuggling and low welfare imports in order to shape our future policy.

The Government shares the public’s high regard for animal welfare. We are delivering a series of ambitious reforms, as outlined in the Action Plan for Animal Welfare. We wish to improve the welfare of farm animals and are considering the case for introducing further reforms, in areas such as the use of cages for laying hens and farrowing crates for pigs.

In coming to an assessment of the potential merits of banning cages we will wish to consult all interested organisations.

The new energy-from-waste plant will replace the existing facility at Edmonton and has been permitted and assessed based on an environmental impact assessment for a maximum of 700,000 tonnes per year, as opposed to 750,000 tonnes for the existing plant. The permitted capacity is not being increased.

All energy-from-waste plants in England must comply with strict emission limits under the Environmental Permitting Regulations and cannot operate unless issued with a permit by the Environment Agency (EA). The EA assesses the emissions from new plant as part of its permitting process and consults Public Health England on every application it receives.

In the future, if the operator wishes to increase the capacity of the plant, they will need to apply to the EA for a permit variation, including details on any changes to the impact on air quality. The EA would only grant a variation if it was satisfied that the proposed increase in capacity would not have a significant impact on the environment or human health.

Once the plant becomes operational, the EA will perform regular inspections and audits to ensure that the plant is complying with the requirement of its permit. That will include checks of the results of the continuous air emissions monitoring which all energy-from-waste plants must do.

I have no plans to publish this information. However, my Department would be happy to consider any request submitted under the statutory conditions set out in the Freedom of Information Act or Environmental Information Regulations.

Defra has not undertaken any such review.

Local authorities prepare local waste plans in which they consider their area’s waste infrastructure needs. They will need to take account of the Resources and Waste Strategy ambitions and measures in their assumptions around planning future waste infrastructure needs.

In December 2018, the Government published its Resources and Waste Strategy which outlines how we will work towards our ambitions of doubling resource productivity and producing zero avoidable waste by 2050. Introducing the Collection and Packaging Reforms are a key part of the policy measures required to meet the targets set in the Strategy, by helping to recycle more material and increasing the quality of the material being collected for recycling. Due to the combined impacts of consistent recycling collections, Extended Producers Responsibility for packaging and a Deposit Return Scheme for drinks containers, we estimate that we will meet our commitment of a municipal waste recycling rate of 65% by 2035.

In addition, in October 2020 as part of the Circular Economy Package, we legislated through the Environmental (England and Wales) Permitting Regulations 2016 to include a permit condition for landfill and incineration operators, meaning they cannot accept separately collected paper, metal, glass or plastic for landfill or incineration unless it has gone through some form of treatment process first, and post treatment this is deemed to be the best environmental outcome. This is in addition to existing permit measures that already prevent the acceptance of recyclable material.

The above measures will reduce the levels of residual waste needing to be treated through incineration (including with energy recovery) or landfilled.

Defra is working closely with the dairy industry to manage the impact of COVID-19. Demand for milk and some dairy products has increased in supermarkets and the vast majority of Britain’s dairy farmers continue to supply their contracts at the usual price. However, between 5 and 10 per cent of total milk production goes to the service trade, and these farmers have been impacted by the significantly reduced demand.

At the outset of the pandemic, the Government announced a number of emergency measures to support farmers, processors, and retailers. These include designating the food sector as critical to the response, with those working in the production, processing, sale, distribution or delivery of food categorised as “key workers” and granting derogations on drivers’ hours limitations.

In addition, to support milk producers, the Government announced on 17 April a temporary easing of some elements of competition law to make it easier for the dairy industry to come together to maximise production, processing and storage efficiency and ensure as much product as possible can be processed into high quality dairy products. This approach will allow the market for milk to adjust to the change in demand for milk while allowing production to be restored when shops, restaurants and pubs are able to open again. Exempted activities have been developed in conjunction with the dairy industry.

The Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) together with Dairy UK are launching a new £1 million campaign to drive consumption of milk and other dairy products. Running over 12 weeks, the campaign will highlight the role that milk and other dairy products play in supporting moments of personal connection during times of crisis. Defra and the devolved administrations are jointly contributing towards the financing of this campaign.

The dairy industry can access various Government backed loan schemes. The COVID-19 Business Interruption Loans scheme is available to farmers, milk buyers and milk processors. In addition, the new Bounce Back Loan scheme, which will apply to businesses including those operating in agriculture, will ensure that the smallest businesses can access up to £50,000 loans.

In recognition of the unprecedented challenges facing this sector, on 6 May 2020, Defra announced a new fund to help support those dairy farmers who have seen decreased demand due to the loss of the food service sector. The new fund will provide support for those most in need. Eligible dairy farmers in England will be entitled to up to £10,000 each, to cover 70% of their lost income during April and May to ensure they can continue to operate and sustain production capacity without impacts on animal welfare.

Public intervention for skimmed milk powder and butter continues to be available. Industry can sell skimmed milk powder and butter into public intervention when the price they would receive on the open market falls below the intervention price. This provides a floor price for dairy products. From 7 May, UK dairy processors are also eligible to apply for EU funded private storage aid in respect of skimmed milk powder, butter and cheese.

The Government is aware that coronavirus represents a very significant challenge, affecting daily life and every part of the economy. The agricultural sector plays a vital role in maintaining the UK’s food security. We are working closely alongside the agricultural industry to ensure that we understand and manage the impacts to the industry.

The department has been in close discussion with banks to ensure the farming sector has access to financial support to ease cashflow problems during this period, including through the HMG backed Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan (CBIL), and the Bounce Back Loan scheme, which was announced on 27 April, and is the latest step in a package of support measures announced by the Chancellor. The Government will provide lenders with a 100% guarantee on each loan, to give lenders the confidence they need to support small businesses. These loans will be from £2,000 up to £50,000, capped at 25% of firms’ turnover, and the Government will cover the first 12 months of interest payments and fees charged to the business by the lender. Almost all UK businesses will be eligible to apply for a loan under the scheme.

In March, Defra worked with BEIS to introduce new measures to support businesses in the food sector keep food supply flowing on to shelves and into homes. These included a temporary relaxation of competition rules to allow supermarkets to work together. The legislation to bring in this change was introduced on 27 March and has a retrospective effect from 1 March.

In April, we temporarily relaxed further elements of competition law to support the dairy sector during this period. Legislation was laid before Parliament on 1 May to enable collaboration between dairy farmers and producers, supporting them to adapt to changes in the supply chain including decreased demand from the hospitality sector. The legislation will apply retrospectively from 1 April 2020.

On 6 May, Defra announced a new fund to support English dairy farmers who have seen decreased demand due to the loss of the food service sector. Dairy farmers access this funding for those qualifying months, with no cap set on the number of farmers who can receive this support or on the total funding available. Eligible dairy farmers who have lost more than 25% of their income over April and May due to coronavirus disruptions will be eligible for funding of up to £10,000 each, to cover around 70% of their lost income during the qualifying months to ensure they can continue to operate and sustain production capacity without impacts on animal welfare. The Welsh Government announced the opening of a similar scheme on 12 May.

The availability of this funding followed the launch on 5 May of a joint Government and Devolved Administrations backed £1 million campaign aiming to boost milk consumption and help producers use their surplus stock. This 12-week campaign is being led by Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) and Dairy UK. This follows a similar on-going campaign led by AHDB and retailers to promote the consumption of beef products.

While the Government has made a wide-ranging package of measures available to businesses to support them through this difficult period, we continue to keep the situation in each sector under review. Legal powers were included in the COVID-19 Bill enabling us to offer further financial support if we believe it is necessary.

Whilst Defra does not directly work with schools to reduce their use of single use plastics, the Government published the Resources and Waste Strategy (RWS) in December 2018, setting out our plans to reduce, reuse and recycle more plastic than we do now. Our target is to eliminate all avoidable plastic waste throughout the life of the 25 Year Environment Plan, but for the most problematic plastics we are going faster - that is why we are committing to work towards all plastic packaging placed on the UK market being recyclable, reusable or compostable by 2025.

Our landmark Environment Bill will enable us to significantly change the way that we manage our waste and take forward a number of the proposals in the RWS. The Bill will enable us to create extended producer responsibility schemes; introduce deposit return schemes; establish greater consistency in the recycling system and charge for single use plastic items, all of which will assist with reducing and dealing with single use plastics in schools.

The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP), supported by Defra, works to deliver practical solutions to improve resource efficiency. Through RecycleNow, a national recycling campaign for England, they run an engagement programme targeted towards primary school children and encouraging them to think about recycling and sustainability.

In addition, Keep Britain Tidy runs an England-wide Eco-Schools programme, working with schools to educate young people about the dangers of littering.

In line with the requirements of the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) Common Approaches (2016) and Equator Principles (2013), UK Export Finance (UKEF) will monitor the ongoing environmental, social and human rights (ESHR) performance of the Mozambique LNG Project to be satisfied that it is being constructed and operated in compliance with applicable local and international laws, and aligns with relevant international ESHR standards, including the International Finance Corporation (IFC) Performance Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability. UKEF will be supported in this performance monitoring by an independent ESHR consultant and an independent security consultant. There is also ongoing monitoring of the security threat situation and validation of the Project’s reports and management plans through the UK, US and French Embassies in Mozambique.

The Mozambique LNG Project is committed to following the UN Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, which provide guidance on good international practice in terms of conducting security operations while respecting human rights. The Project has a Community Security Plan in place which is aligned with international standards. The Community Security Plan has recently been updated in light of the dynamic security situation in the region.

While UK Export Finance (UKEF) has been approached by and held initial meetings with the sponsors of the East African Crude Oil Pipeline project (EACOP), it has not engaged in any substantive due diligence on the project and so considers this to be an early-stage enquiry. As such, at this early stage UKEF was not able to make any reliable assessment of whether the transaction might progress or, if so, over what timeframe.

On 12 December 2020, the Prime Minister announced that the British government will no longer provide any new direct financial or promotional support for the fossil fuel energy sector overseas. This policy will be implemented as soon as possible following the conclusion of the consultation process that was also launched on 12 December.

During the consultation period and ahead of the implementation of the new policy, the government will continue to apply current policy for all in-scope activities including proposals for high carbon projects, with consideration of relevant factors including climate change.

I refer the Hon. Member for Edmonton to my responses to the Hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston on 18 November 2020 (UIN: 91998) and 25 November 2020 (UIN: 118072), which listed the fossil fuel related projects that UK Export Finance is currently considering for 2021, their locations, and the type of fossil fuel involved.

The new policy on ending government’s support to fossil fuels overseas announced by the Prime Minister at the Climate Ambition Summit will be implemented as soon as possible following the conclusion of the consultation process that was launched on 12 December.

During the consultation period and ahead of the implementation of the new policy, the government will continue to apply current policy for all in-scope activities including proposals for high carbon projects, with consideration of relevant factors including climate change.

The projects referred to in my response to the Hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston on 18 November 2020 (UIN: 91998) are still under consideration by UK Export Finance, and no decisions have been made. It is our policy not to comment on potential transactions for reasons of commercial sensitivity.

UK Export Finance (UKEF) has been approached on the project referred to, but no decision has been made.

The projects referred to in the response to Question 91998 are still under consideration, and we cannot comment on potential transactions for reasons of commercial confidentiality.

UK Export Finance (UKEF) has a specialist environmental, social, and human rights (ESHR) team that reviews relevant projects for such risks and impacts (including consideration of climate change) prior to UKEF taking a decision on support. ESHR reviews are undertaken in strict alignment with international frameworks for managing such ESHR risks and impacts, namely the OECD Council Recommendation on Common Approaches for Officially Supported Export Credits and Environmental and Social Due Diligence (OECD Common Approaches) and Equator Principles, which was updated in July 2020 to strengthen requirements related to climate change and human rights. The ESHR team undertakes these reviews to be satisfied that relevant projects should comply with applicable local and relevant international laws, and align with international ESHR standards, before support is provided. Where UKEF provides support to such projects it undertakes on-going ESHR monitoring over the period of that support.

Where a relevant project is identified as having a high potential impact on the environment and/or social matters/human rights, UKEF publishes Category A notices to inform stakeholders of its consideration of such a project.

Furthermore, from 1 April 2020, UKEF has committed to consider how it will take account of climate change within its decision-making processes across all its products. This consideration will be proportionate to the risks and impacts associated with the projects and its support.

The projects referred to in the response to Question 91998 are still under consideration by UK Export Finance, and no decisions have been made. It is our policy not to comment on potential transactions for reasons of commercial sensitivity.

UK Export Finance (UKEF) has been approached on the project referred to, and no decision has been made. It is not UKEF policy to comment on potential transactions for reasons of commercial sensitivity.

HM Government takes its arms export responsibilities seriously and assesses export licence applications in accordance with strict licensing criteria.

Through our rigorous process, 87 export licences were granted for military related items to Saudi Arabia, during the period 20^th June 2019 to 29^th September 2020.

We will not license the export of equipment where to do so would be inconsistent with the Consolidated Criteria; no licences had to be refused on this basis in the aforementioned period.

In line with its regular policy, UK Export Finance (UKEF) has undertaken an environmental, social and human rights (ESHR) review of the Mozambique LNG Project. This was undertaken in strict alignment with international frameworks for managing such ESHR risks and impacts. UKEF’s review was conducted alongside other export credit agencies and the African Development Bank, with the support of an independent ESHR consultant. This review considered all the relevant ESHR documentation provided by the Project sponsors such as ESHR impact assessments, strategies, management and monitoring plans amongst others and included studies undertaken since the publication of the Project’s impact assessment.

UKEF published, in August 2019, a Category A notice of its consideration of the Project which includes a link to an Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment (ESHIA) of the Mozambique LNG project and related information. In undertaking its review, UKEF considered the most up-to-date ESHIA. The Category A notice can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/category-a-project-under-consideration-mozambique-lng-project

As Mozambique is progressively emerging from debt distress, UK Export Finance (UKEF) support is subject to meeting the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Sustainable Lending Principles, which include a consideration of the economic and social development benefits of the Project to Mozambique. The Department for International Development provided confirmation that these benefits would be met by the Project.

The Project is directly supported by the African Development Bank. The World Bank and IMF are supportive of the Project. All three of these organisations are leading international financing institutions with developmental mandates and goals.

The Project’s Environmental and Social Impact Assessment presents the direct and indirect (Scope 1 and Scope 2) contribution of the Project to Mozambique’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) baseline, which is estimated to account for approximately 6 - 10% of Mozambique’s national GHG emissions. This was estimated in accordance with the GHG Protocol: Corporate Accounting & Reporting Standard developed by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI). The Project’s Scope 3 emissions are produced by the use of the Project’s LNG. Calculating LNG Scope 3 emissions is highly complex and requires details of when, where, how and how much of the Project’s gas volumes will be used. UK Export Finance (UKEF) made some reasonable assumptions about Scope 3 emissions, that it then took into account in its review of the Project. There is scope, however, for the Project to replace / displace more polluting hydrocarbon sources, such as oil and coal, which would result in lower net emissions than using these energy sources.

UKEF considered climate change as part of its review of the Project including considering the potential lock-in risks from the Project. It is not known for certain whether the Project will displace renewable energy potential or lower carbon solutions. However, for Mozambique, the need for financial resources to support the country’s climate resilience is noteworthy and, as per Mozambique’s own Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), UKEF considers that the financial outputs of this Project will act as a catalyst towards enabling the country’s climate change plans to be fulfilled, and thus to allow investment in the renewables sector.

The International Energy Agency notes that demand for energy cannot be met for the
foreseeable future (i.e. up to 2040) without oil and gas. Even under a sustainable
development scenario, gas is expected to account for 24% of global primary energy
demand in 2040. The Paris Agreement (Article 4.1) recognises that the peaking of
greenhouse gases will take longer for developing countries, such as Mozambique, and the Project sits within Mozambique’s longer-term plans to establish strong social and
economic stability.

The support provided by UKEF takes the form of direct loans or loan guarantees, rather than equity funding.

The Project’s Environmental and Social Impact Assessment presents the direct and indirect (Scope 1 and Scope 2) contribution of the Project to Mozambique’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) baseline, which is estimated to account for approximately 6 - 10% of Mozambique’s national GHG emissions. This was estimated in accordance with the GHG Protocol: Corporate Accounting & Reporting Standard developed by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI). The Project’s Scope 3 emissions are produced by the use of the Project’s LNG. Calculating LNG Scope 3 emissions is highly complex and requires details of when, where, how and how much of the Project’s gas volumes will be used. UK Export Finance (UKEF) made some reasonable assumptions about Scope 3 emissions, that it then took into account in its review of the Project. There is scope, however, for the Project to replace / displace more polluting hydrocarbon sources, such as oil and coal, which would result in lower net emissions than using these energy sources.

UKEF considered climate change as part of its review of the Project including considering the potential lock-in risks from the Project. It is not known for certain whether the Project will displace renewable energy potential or lower carbon solutions. However, for Mozambique, the need for financial resources to support the country’s climate resilience is noteworthy and, as per Mozambique’s own Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), UKEF considers that the financial outputs of this Project will act as a catalyst towards enabling the country’s climate change plans to be fulfilled, and thus to allow investment in the renewables sector.

The International Energy Agency notes that demand for energy cannot be met for the
foreseeable future (i.e. up to 2040) without oil and gas. Even under a sustainable
development scenario, gas is expected to account for 24% of global primary energy
demand in 2040. The Paris Agreement (Article 4.1) recognises that the peaking of
greenhouse gases will take longer for developing countries, such as Mozambique, and the Project sits within Mozambique’s longer-term plans to establish strong social and
economic stability.

The support provided by UKEF takes the form of direct loans or loan guarantees, rather than equity funding.

The Project’s Environmental and Social Impact Assessment presents the direct and indirect (Scope 1 and Scope 2) contribution of the Project to Mozambique’s greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) baseline, which is estimated to account for approximately 6 - 10% of Mozambique’s national GHG emissions. This was estimated in accordance with the GHG Protocol: Corporate Accounting & Reporting Standard developed by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) and the World Resources Institute (WRI). The Project’s Scope 3 emissions are produced by the use of the Project’s LNG. Calculating LNG Scope 3 emissions is highly complex and requires details of when, where, how and how much of the Project’s gas volumes will be used. UK Export Finance (UKEF) made some reasonable assumptions about Scope 3 emissions, that it then took into account in its review of the Project. There is scope, however, for the Project to replace / displace more polluting hydrocarbon sources, such as oil and coal, which would result in lower net emissions than using these energy sources.

UKEF considered climate change as part of its review of the Project including considering the potential lock-in risks from the Project. It is not known for certain whether the Project will displace renewable energy potential or lower carbon solutions. However, for Mozambique, the need for financial resources to support the country’s climate resilience is noteworthy and, as per Mozambique’s own Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), UKEF considers that the financial outputs of this Project will act as a catalyst towards enabling the country’s climate change plans to be fulfilled, and thus to allow investment in the renewables sector.

The International Energy Agency notes that demand for energy cannot be met for the
foreseeable future (i.e. up to 2040) without oil and gas. Even under a sustainable
development scenario, gas is expected to account for 24% of global primary energy
demand in 2040. The Paris Agreement (Article 4.1) recognises that the peaking of
greenhouse gases will take longer for developing countries, such as Mozambique, and the Project sits within Mozambique’s longer-term plans to establish strong social and
economic stability.

The support provided by UKEF takes the form of direct loans or loan guarantees, rather than equity funding.

The Mozambique LNG Project is still under consideration, and we cannot comment on potential transactions for reasons of commercial confidentiality.

UK Export Finance (UKEF) carries out due diligence on all relevant aspects of a project before coming to a decision on whether to provide support.

As the question acknowledges, the Government has already published a Category A notice which includes a link to an Environmental, Social and Health Impact Assessment (ESHR) of the Mozambique LNG project and related information. The Category A Notice is available here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/category-a-project-under-consideration-mozambique-lng-project/category-a-project-under-consideration-mozambique-lng-project

UKEF has a specialist ESHR team that reviews relevant projects for such risks and impacts prior to UKEF taking a decision on support.

There are no extant licences in scope of this request.

Licences have been granted to both EDO MBM Technology Ltd and other companies for military items for use by the Turkish armed forces.

We continue to monitor the situation in Syria very closely and are considering the licensing position in the light of recent developments. No further export licences to Turkey, for items which might be used in military operations in Syria, will be granted while we do so.

HM Government publishes official statistics (on a quarterly and annual basis) about export licences on gov.uk; these reports contain detailed information on the type of export licences issued, refused or revoked, by destination type (e.g. military, other) and a summary of the items covered by these licences.

Licences have been granted to both EDO MBM Technology Ltd and other companies for military items for use by the Turkish armed forces.

We continue to monitor the situation in Syria very closely and are considering the licensing position in the light of recent developments. No further export licences to Turkey, for items which might be used in military operations in Syria, will be granted while we do so.

HM Government publishes official statistics (on a quarterly and annual basis) about export licences on gov.uk; these reports contain detailed information on the type of export licences issued, refused or revoked, by destination type (e.g. military, other) and a summary of the items covered by these licences.

Ministers regularly hold meetings with representatives from the train operating companies.

Information on Ministers' meetings with train operating companies is included in the Ministers’ Transparency Publication, issued on a quarterly basis, and is available via this webpage:

Transparency and freedom of information releases - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

Ministers and officials regularly hold meetings with representatives from the train operating companies.

Ministers and officials regularly hold meetings with representatives from the train operating companies.

As stated in Question 104324 the Department meets regularly with representatives from train operating companies to discuss a range of topics as part of its contractual relationships with them.

The Dispute Handling Guide has previously been disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. A copy of this will also be published on gov.uk shortly.

Ministers and officials regularly hold meetings with representatives from the train operating companies.

The Department is working with industry to ensure that we are taking all possible steps to keep as much of the railway as possible running for passengers and freight, and that passengers and businesses are kept fully informed of the impact of disruption. Network Rail is also working to ensure as many planned engineering works as possible can go ahead in the Christmas period.

Departmental officials are taking part in regular roundtables and bilateral discussions with those industries most disrupted by industrial action so the Department and rail industry can better understand the concerns of businesses and passenger groups.

The Government has provided Transport for London (TfL) with more than £4 billion of support through three extraordinary funding and financing agreements since May 2020. The Department for Transport continues to work closely with TfL to support it onto a sustainable financial footing while ensuring a fair deal for the taxpayer.

The Government currently provides approximately £1 billion per year of funding for capital investment to Transport for London (TfL). This is in addition to the three extraordinary funding and financing agreements since May 2020, worth more than £4 billion. These agreements take steps to place TfL on a financially sustainable footing while offering a fair deal for the taxpayer. In the most recent agreement, of 1 June 2021, the Government has committed to review of options for longer term reform of the funding framework for Transport for London, including governance and oversight. We continue to work with the Mayor and TfL on those options, and it would be inappropriate to comment at this stage.

We are giving careful consideration to the large volume of responses to this consultation and will publish the outcome as soon as possible.

Platform edge tactiles are part of the scope for more than 100 accessible routes due to be installed under our Access for All programme by 2024. In addition, whenever the industry installs, replaces or renews platform infrastructure they are required to install tactiles.

I have asked Network Rail to work up a costed plan for a wider roll out of tactiles for stations where tactiles are not being delivered under another programme.

The Government has published 'Safer Transport' guidance for transport operators and 'Safer Travel' guidance for passengers, as well as specific safety guidance for owners, operators and drivers of taxis and private hire vehicles (PHVs). The Government is developing further guidance on installing protective screens in taxis and PHVs.

In addition, the Government continues to provide £27.3 million per week of Covid-19 Bus Services Support Grant (CBSSG) funding to bus operators and local authorities and will do so until it is agreed that this funding is no longer needed. CBSSG funding allows bus operators to provide up to 100% of pre-Covid service levels in order to accommodate social distancing, while also helping operators to implement safety measures to protect staff and passengers, including protective screens in driver’s cabs and enhanced cleaning of vehicles.

Aviation security remains a priority for the Government. There are currently no plans to lift or increase the levels of liquid currently permitted to be carried by aircraft crew through security. We do however regularly assess our security measures to ensure they are proportionate and effective, including taking advice from the Civil Aviation Authority.

Aviation security remains a priority for the Government. There are currently no plans to lift or increase the levels of liquid currently permitted to be carried by aircraft crew through security. We do however regularly assess our security measures to ensure they are proportionate and effective, including taking advice from the Civil Aviation Authority.

Portugal was added to the travel corridor list on 22 August.

It would not be appropriate to comment on individual discussions. However, we recognise that this will be very distressing news for BA employees and their families, and we stand ready to support them.

The aviation sector is essential to the UK economy, and firms can draw upon the unprecedented package of measures, including: schemes to raise capital, flexibilities with tax bills, and financial support for employees. If airlines find themselves in trouble because of coronavirus, and have exhausted the measures already available to them, the Transport Secretary is clear that the Government is prepared to enter discussions with individual companies seeking bespoke support as a last resort, having exhausted all other options.??Any intervention would need to represent value for money for taxpayers.

Information on the number of claimants convicted of fraud after having their claim suspended by the Department’s Risk Review Team is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.

Since the beginning of December 2022, the Risk Review Team have reinstated 627 cases that were previously suspended.

The Risk Review Team currently have 108,362 cases suspended.

I refer the Hon. Member to the answer given to PQ 5616.

You ask: whether his Department uses (a) automated or (b) partially automated technologies to (i) investigate benefit claimants or claims.

The department does not use (a) automated or (b) partially automated technologies to (i) investigate benefit claimants or claims.

You further ask: whether his Department uses (a) automated or (b) partially automated technologies to select or refer benefit claimant or claims for possible investigation?

Yes, DWP’s Integrated Risk and Intelligence Service uses automated/partially automated technologies to identify claims that may warrant closer inspection (or may need additional consideration), assisting in the prevention and detection of fraud and error. It is right that we keep up with fraud in today’s digital age so that we can prevent, detect and deter those who would try to exploit the benefit system and more importantly, improve our support for genuine claimants. Any risk of fraud or error identified is reviewed by a trained member of staff and this is only one of a number of verification steps which will have to be cleared before an investigation is begun or before a claim is paid.

A decision to investigate a claimant is always made by a case handler who would take into account all relevant facts and circumstances.

Where automated technologies are used, DWP is always committed to processing data lawfully, proportionately, and ethically, with meaningful human input and safeguards for the protection of individuals.

We do not use automated technologies to replace human judgement to determine or deny a payment to a claimant. A human agent will always make final decisions and Equality and Data Protection Impact Assessments are carried out.

The monthly Universal Credit earnings threshold is based on 16 hours a week at the National Living Wage. The cap is applied to those earning under that level to encourage people into work and reduce long term dependency on benefits.

The Government firmly believes that where possible it is in the best interests of children to be in working households and the benefit cap provides a clear incentive to move into work.

The Government clearly recognises that high childcare costs can affect parents’ decisions to take up paid work or increase their working hours which is why the changes to the UC childcare element announced in the Spring Budget 2023 will provide generous additional financial support to parents moving into work and/or significantly increasing their working hours.

The UC childcare policy aligns with the wider government free childcare offer and the Tax-Free Childcare offer. The current free childcare offer provides 15 hours a week of free childcare in England for all 3- and 4-year old’s and disadvantaged 2-year old's, doubling for working parents of 3- and 4-year-old to 30 hours a week. From April 2024, working parents of 2-year-olds will be able to access 15 hours of free childcare per week. This will be extended to working parents of 9 months to 2-year-olds from September 2024. From September 2025, all eligible working parents of children aged 9 months up to 3 years will be able to access 30 free hours per week.

Universal Credit guidance is available for work coaches and also published in the House of Commons library. The department is committed to refreshing these at regular intervals.

Many claimants who have a health condition choose to work. This is why the department continues to provide support to those claimants not exempt from the benefit cap to help prepare and move into or towards work.

A full range of support is available to claimants, which includes work coach interviews, national and local provision. This support and advice is ongoing and can include, for example, employment support to help them find work, budgeting support, housing advice and signposting to local authorities to access to Discretionary Housing Payments

The Government clearly recognises that high childcare costs can affect parents’ decisions to take up paid work or increase their working hours, which is why the changes to the UC childcare element announced in the Spring Budget 2023 will provide generous additional financial support to parents moving into work and/or significantly increasing their working hours.

Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) and Universal Credit (UC) tribunal decisions are processed in a different team to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) tribunal decisions. Although there is no target for implementing ESA and UC tribunal decisions, the department’s overarching objective is, and always has been, to do so without delay.

Households receiving severe disability benefits and/or entitled to carer benefits are exempt from the benefit cap.

The latest statistics can be found at Benefit cap statistics - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

One of the main aims of the benefit cap is to incentivise behaviours that encourage people into work and reduce long term dependency on benefits. Reflecting that aim there is an associated exception to the cap when a household has earnings of at least £658 a month (£722 from April 2023).

Getting our claimants back into work remains our primary concern and returning to employment will significantly increase the likelihood of a household not being affected by the cap.

All claimants without a specific work coach, for example, have access to support and advice on a voluntary basis. The full range of support is available to claimants, which includes work coach interviews, national and local provision. Work Coaches will ensure that claimants understand how moving into work, progressing in work and earning more will help them financially alongside advising them of the level of earnings they need to have in order to be exempt from the Benefit Cap.

The support and advice is ongoing and can also include, for example, employment support to help them find work, budgeting support, housing advice and signposting to local authorities to access to Discretionary Housing Payments.

Capped households are directed to further information and advice available on Gov.uk via the Universal Credit monthly statement.

There are also multiple local jobs fairs, disability confident events and a wide variety event of training available.

A full range of support is available to claimants, which includes work coach interviews, national and local provision. This support and advice is ongoing and can include, for example, employment support to help them find work, budgeting support, housing advice and signposting to local authorities to access to Discretionary Housing Payments.

People with health conditions and disabilities can access direct support from Disability Employment Advisors in Jobcentres. This is in addition to Additional Work Coach Support which will provide disabled people and people with health conditions with increased one-to-one personalised support. Additional Work Coach Support is already live in one third of jobcentres. It will be available in more jobcentres from spring 2023 and will be available nationally by 2024.

There are also multiple local jobs fairs, disability confident events and a wide variety event of training available.

An assessment has been undertaken and the findings form part of the evaluation of the lower tiered benefit cap which is scheduled to be published in due course.

212 out of 188,119 claimants who have had their cases suspended by the Risk Review Team have appealed the decision (0.11%) with 42 claimants having their appeal allowed, which is 0.02% of the total number of claims suspended.

Personal Independence Payment has a target of 28 days for implementing a tribunal’s decision and is currently averaging around 10 days.

Employment and Support Allowance and Universal Credit do not have an overarching target. Decisions are implemented as quickly as possible, with some exceptions.

For all three benefits, information on the average time to reinstate payments for the period requested is not collated centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

If a decision is not implemented timeously, there is guidance published by HMCTS and available on Gov.UK, entitled ‘How to appeal against a decision made by the Department for Work and Pensions’.

The main reason that a tribunal’s decision might not be implemented timeously, is if the Secretary of State considers that the decision may contain an error of law and suspends payment of the tribunal’s award whilst that is considered. In such a case the claimant must be notified that this is being done. If the claimant is not notified of a reason for the decision not being implemented, then they can contact the department: this can be done by using the telephone numbers on Gov.UK, on the decision letter they received, or by attending a Jobcentre; if it is a UC appeal they can use their journal.

Personal Independence Payment has a target of 28 days for implementing a tribunal’s decision and is currently averaging around 10 days.

Employment and Support Allowance and Universal Credit do not have an overarching target. Decisions are implemented as quickly as possible, with some exceptions.

For all three benefits, information on the average time to reinstate payments for the period requested is not collated centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

If a decision is not implemented timeously, there is guidance published by HMCTS and available on Gov.UK, entitled ‘How to appeal against a decision made by the Department for Work and Pensions’.

The main reason that a tribunal’s decision might not be implemented timeously, is if the Secretary of State considers that the decision may contain an error of law and suspends payment of the tribunal’s award whilst that is considered. In such a case the claimant must be notified that this is being done. If the claimant is not notified of a reason for the decision not being implemented, then they can contact the department: this can be done by using the telephone numbers on Gov.UK, on the decision letter they received, or by attending a Jobcentre; if it is a UC appeal they can use their journal.

Personal Independence Payment has a target of 28 days for implementing a tribunal’s decision and is currently averaging around 10 days.

Employment and Support Allowance and Universal Credit do not have an overarching target. Decisions are implemented as quickly as possible, with some exceptions.

For all three benefits, information on the average time to reinstate payments for the period requested is not collated centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

If a decision is not implemented timeously, there is guidance published by HMCTS and available on Gov.UK, entitled ‘How to appeal against a decision made by the Department for Work and Pensions’.

The main reason that a tribunal’s decision might not be implemented timeously, is if the Secretary of State considers that the decision may contain an error of law and suspends payment of the tribunal’s award whilst that is considered. In such a case the claimant must be notified that this is being done. If the claimant is not notified of a reason for the decision not being implemented, then they can contact the department: this can be done by using the telephone numbers on Gov.UK, on the decision letter they received, or by attending a Jobcentre; if it is a UC appeal they can use their journal.

Under Universal Credit the cap is disapplied if a household has earnings that are equal to or above a prescribed earnings threshold, which is currently £658 /16 hours per week at National living wage.

Getting our claimants back into work remains our primary concern and returning to employment will significantly increase the likelihood of a household not being affected by the cap.

The Benefit Cap provides a strong work incentive and fairness for hard-working taxpaying households, whilst providing a reasonable safety net of support for the most vulnerable.

The Government firmly believes that where possible it is in the best interests of children to be in working households and the benefit cap provides a clear incentive to move into work.

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has completed his statutory annual up-rating review and State Pension and benefit rates will increase in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) for the year to September 2022. This means the rate of Universal Credit standard allowance will increase by 10.1% from 10 April 2023.

The Benefit Cap provides a strong work incentive and fairness for hard-working taxpaying households, whilst providing a reasonable safety net of support for the most vulnerable.

The Government firmly believes that where possible it is in the best interests of children to be in working households and the benefit cap provides a clear incentive to move into work.

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has completed his statutory annual up-rating review and State Pension and benefit rates will increase in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) for the year to September 2022. This means the rate of Universal Credit standard allowance will increase by 10.1% from 10 April 2023.

A range of employment support and advice is available from Work Coaches in Jobcentres to help people earn enough to be exempt from the cap and start to become less reliant on benefits.

A range of employment support and advice is available from Work Coaches in Jobcentres to help people earn enough to be exempt from the cap and start to become less reliant on benefits.

A range of employment support and advice is available from Work Coaches in Jobcentres to help people earn enough to be exempt from the cap and start to become less reliant on benefits.

The Centre for Health and Disability Assessments (CHDA) conduct Work Capability Assessments (WCAs) on behalf of the Department for Work & Pensions and has their own complaints process. Complaints received by the department, which are solely about the WCA, are redirected to CHDA. For a more in-depth response, I refer the Honourable Member to the answer I gave to her previous question, PQ55085.

The Centre for Health and Disability Assessments (CHDA) conduct Work Capability Assessments (WCAs) on behalf of the Department for Work & Pensions and has their own complaints process. Complaints received by the department, which are solely about the WCA, are redirected to CHDA. For a more in-depth response, I refer the Honourable Member to the answer I gave to her previous question, PQ55085.

As of 11^th February 2023, the cumulative total of customer cases reinstated following review by the Risk Review Team is 7,221.

The information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.

As of 11^th February 2023, the cumulative total of customer cases suspended by the Risk Review Team is 188,119.

Of these, 71,496 have been closed and 109,402 remain suspended. The remaining 7,221 have been reinstated following review.

As of October 2022, the number of current Personal Independence Payment (PIP) recipients, who received an ongoing award at their initial clearance, is 542,880. The number of these recipients who have had their claims reassessed since 2020 is 16,010, which is 3% of the total. In this figure, a reassessment is defined as either a planned award review or a claimant-initiated change of circumstances.

Source: PIP Atomic Data Store (ADS)

Notes:

• This is unpublished data. It should be used with caution and it may be subject to future revision;
• Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10; and
• Figures include England and Wales only.

The information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.

Information on Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants with degenerative conditions is not available. While the department holds data on a range of conditions, these are not collected centrally in a way that defines them as degenerative or not.

Detailed statistics on PIP can be found on Stat-Xplore. In particular, the dataset on PIP clearances lists the disability categories recorded on PIP, as well as the award level for both components at initial decision. Over 500 conditions are covered, but none are grouped or marked in any way as being degenerative. You can also view the disability categories here.

Guidance on how to use Stat-Xplore can be found here. An account is not required to use Stat- Xplore, the ‘Guest Login’ feature gives instant access to the main functions.

Referring to our previous answer to PQ88966, we currently have no plans to publish audit results for Independent Assessment Services (IAS)/Atos and Capita. This includes publishing a breakdown of audit assessment grades given for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessments.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements (SLAs) setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience. When requested in Parliamentary Questions and Freedom of Information requests, we do publish all the relevant data available. The monthly quality audit performance against the SLA target for IAS and Capita for the period January 2014 to April 2022 has already been published as part of the answer to PQ26035.

The proportion of Personal Independence Payment assessments carried out by (a) Independent Assessment Services (IAS)/Atos and (b) Capita that were audited by the department in each year since 2018, is shown in the table below:

Please note

• The number of audited assessments is shown as a proportion of completed assessments carried out by the assessment providers.
• The proportion shown for the year 2022 only includes data from January 2022 to November 2022, as the data for December 2022 is not yet available.
• Although the proportions being audited between IAS and Capita are different, the sample sizes used are designed to ensure the results give the same level of accuracy and margin of error across each provider contractual area.
• The above data regarding completed assessments is derived from contractual management information produced by the assessment providers.
• The above data regarding number of assessments audited is derived from contractual management information produced by the Independent Audit Team.
• The above data is derived from unpublished management information which is collected for internal departmental use only and has not been quality assured to Official Statistics Publication standards.

The proportion of Personal Independence Payment assessments carried out by Atos and Capita, that were found to have been of an unacceptable standard, are shown below:

Please Note:

• U grades shown are as a proportion of audited assessments carried out by Independent Audit on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions;
• Only audited assessments are included in the data for this response;
• The above data is derived from unpublished management information which is collected for internal departmental use only and has not been quality assured to Official Statistics Publication standards.

Of the 175 RRT cases lodged under the appeals process quoted in PQ110773, 42 were determined by the First tier Tribunal. Of these, 19 upheld the department’s decision either partially (2) or fully (17).

The department is committed to making the right decision as early as possible in the claims process. At mandatory reconsideration, decisions are reviewed, with the existing evidence considered together with any new evidence provided by the claimant. Decisions will be changed if the evidence supports this.

Since 4th July 2022, when collation of mandatory reconsideration figures commenced under the Risk Review process, there have been 499 mandatory reconsiderations.

346 of which have been completed to outcome, with 2 resulting in a change of decision, which includes 1 being partially revised and 1 being fully revised.

From 21 January 2022, when we started collating figures, there have been 175 appeals lodged under the Risk Review Process.

Of those that have reached an outcome, there are 24 (13.7%) that have lapsed and 23 (13.1%) that have been overturned by the tribunal.

The information requested is not available. We have a stringent performance management regime which includes Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) performance managers attending assessment centres; however, data for such visits is not retained.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience.

Independent Audit is one of the department’s tools to measure quality for performance management purposes. It is a self-contained team comprising of experienced health professional assessors who review a sample of assessment reports on a monthly basis to determine their quality. This helps ensure that assessment reports are fit for purpose, clinically justified, and provide sufficient information for the department to make a reasonable decision on entitlement to benefit. It is not an audit of the assessment provider as a whole.

We currently have no plans to publish the last audit results for Capita and Independent Assessment Services (IAS).

Referring to our previous answer to PQ80819, audit refers to a comprehensive check of the elements of the assessment, including the evidence collection, further evidence provided, and the assessment report completed by the health professional. It is not an audit of the assessment provider.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements (SLA) setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience.

The monthly quality audit performance against the SLA target for Capita and IAS has already been published for January 2014 to April 2022 as part of the answer to PQ26035.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) does not have a contractual obligation to perform regular visits to assessment centres, but does retain the right to visit any assessment centre, at any time, subject to reasonable notice. The department exercises this right, with Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Work Capability Assessment (WCA) performance managers visiting assessment centres on an informal basis.

The department has set standards for the quality of assessments for all its assessment providers and independent auditors. The department ensures a high standard is maintained by having an independent audit function that continually monitors performance and provides feedback to its providers. Audit refers to a comprehensive check of the elements of the assessment, including the evidence collection, further evidence provided, and the assessment report completed by the health professional.

Although assessment providers share training material between themselves to encourage best practice, we have no plans to publish the training material.

The department introduced a Clinical Governance Quality Standards (CGQS) Framework to ensure that consistent quality standards are applied by all assessment providers. The CGQS Forum has the remit to facilitate embedding of the CGQS Framework across the department and its assessment providers. They share best practice including training and learning from leading national and international organisations, to continuously improve quality.

Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment provider audit procedures can be found in sections 3.4 and 3.5 of the PIP assessment guide.

Details relating to the audit procedures for Centre for Health and Disability Assessments can be found in schedule 2.1 section 40 of the Health and Disability Assessment Services contract.

Analysis of unpublished data held by the Department for Work and Pensions provides data on the proportion of tribunals attended by Presenting Officers (PO) where the decision was overturned. This data only covers Employment Support Allowance (ESA) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) tribunals. To provide information across all other DWP administered benefits or for PIP and ESA prior to April 2016 would incur disproportionate cost.

This data is unpublished. It should be used with caution, and it may be subject to future revision.

Proportion of tribunals attended by Presenting Officers where the decision was overturned, by month from April 2016 – June 2022

Note: Number of overturns where PO attended shown as a percentage of appeals where a decision was made, therefore excluding those not cleared or withdrawn/struck out.

Appeals data is taken from the DWP computer system’s management information. Therefore, this appeal data may differ from that held by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons, such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.

We have provided data up to June 2022, in line with published statistics.

Health Professionals (HPs) are subject to a rigorous recruitment process, followed by a comprehensive training programme. Given the high standards expected of HPs, it is anticipated that a number may not meet the required standard during the training and probation period.

All HPs are subject to on-going monitoring of the standard of their assessments. If any issues are identified there is a process in place to support the HPs to improve the quality of their assessments. Where they fall below the required standards and do not improve, processes are in place to revoke their approval to undertake assessments.

The number of HPs employed by assessment providers who have been dismissed as a result of poor performance in the last three years is shown in the table below:

Please note

• Capita 2022 figures are for the period between 1 January 2022 and 4 November 2022;
• IAS 2022 figures are for the period between 1 January 2022 and 4 November 2022;
• CHDA 2022 figures are for the period between 1 January 2022 and 1 November 2022;
• PIP figures include HPs that were dismissed during their training and probation period;
• PIP figures do not include employees who resigned during the training process;
• CHDA figures include HPs that were dismissed during their probation period;
• CHDA figures do not include HPs that failed to successfully complete their training period, nor those who resigned during the training process.

Analysis of unpublished data held by the Department for Work and Pensions provides data on the number of tribunals where Presenting Officers (PO) attended. This data only covers Employment Support Allowance (ESA) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) tribunals. To provide information across all other DWP administered benefits or for PIP and ESA prior to April 2016 would incur disproportionate cost.

This data is unpublished. It should be used with caution, and it may be subject to future revision.

Tribunals attended by Presenting Officers, by month from April 2016 – June 2022

Note:

Appeals data is taken from the DWP computer system’s management information. Therefore, this appeal data may differ from that held by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons, such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.

We have provided data up to June 2022, in line with published statistics.

All employers have a legal duty to consult and involve their employees on health and safety matters. For businesses that recognise trade unions, this legal duty will apply under the Safety Representatives and Safety Committees Regulations 1977 (as amended) and for non-unionised businesses it will apply under the Health and Safety (Consultation with Employees) Regulations 1996 (as amended).

Both sets of regulations provide a legal framework for employers, trade unions and employees to reach agreement on arrangements for health and safety representatives and health and safety committees to operate in their workplace. The regulations do not determine how many safety representatives should be appointed, as this will depend on a number of factors, such as the size of the business and the number of employees.

When preparing an appeal response, the department will review the original decision, considering both evidence previously submitted to DWP and any new evidence submitted by the claimant in support of their appeal. A decision can be revised and the appeal lapsed on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour.

The aim of lapsing is to ensure that decisions which should be changed are identified at this stage, so that the claimant does not need to proceed to an appeal hearing. Where the change does not award the claimant the maximum they could be awarded by a tribunal, the appeal will only be lapsed with the claimant’s agreement.

We published Shaping future support: The Health and Disability Green Paper last year. This asked for views on ways we can improve the experience people have of our benefits system and set out ways we could make our services easier to access, make our processes simpler and help build people’s trust.

We received over 4,500 responses to the Health and Disability Green Paper consultation and are very grateful to all the individuals and organisations who contributed.

We will respond with a White Paper in the coming months.

Assessment quality is a priority for both the department and the assessment providers. We work continuously with providers to drive improvements in assessment quality through a range of measures, including audit procedures, clinical observations (Personal Independence Payment only), clinical coaching, tailored training and development plans, and providing feedback and support to health professionals. Quality performance is also regularly reviewed through DWP and provider senior governance meetings at a national level, and in each of the provider areas.

Providers share training materials between themselves to encourage best practice, standardise processes and improve the claimant experience. They also regularly engage with medical experts, charities, and relevant stakeholders to strengthen, maintain, and update their training programmes.

The department is currently developing a Health and Disability White Paper, which will include health and disability benefit reform proposals, and improvements to the customer journey, enabling people to live independently and move into work where possible.

The Women’s Health Strategy published by the Department of Health sets out a range of commitments including encouraging employers to implement evidence-based workplace support and introduce workplace menopause policies.

An independent menopause and the workplace report was published and the Government’s response was outlined in July.

The Women’s Health Strategy published by the Department of Health sets out a range of commitments including encouraging employers to implement evidence-based workplace support and introduce workplace menopause policies.

An independent menopause and the workplace report was published and the Government’s response was outlined in July.

DWP cover the administration costs of an Appeal. However, the Department is unable to provide the total government spend on defending appeals.

This is because appeals are a joint process between DWP and HM Courts and Tribunals Service. DWP do not handle tribunals for appeals; the cost of handling appeal tribunals sits with HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) and we do not hold their cost information. If this information was required, we would suggest that this element of your request be submitted to HMCTS.

The only DWP staff who attend actual Tribunals (and therefore defend appeals) are Presenting Officers. We do not have information before 2013-14.

The information for the financial years covered by the request are detailed in the tables below:

Cost figures are rounded to the nearest £0.1m

Data Source: ABM

The cost figures quoted are estimated DWP level 1 operating costs, including both direct delivery staff and non-staff costs. Non-staff costs are only those costs incurred in local cost centres, relating to direct delivery staff.

Costs provided are for Presenting Officers only and excludes Admin Support or Decision Making operational staff dealing with the Appeals processing work. Child Maintenance Group figures include Enforcement Presenting Officers.

Please note that the data supplied is from the Departmental Activity Based Models. This data is derived from unpublished management information, which was collected for internal Departmental use only, and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standards. It should therefore be treated with caution. The Departmental Activity Based staffing models are a snapshot of how many people were identified as undertaking specified activities as assigned by line managers.

The data is frequently revised and changes to definitions / benefits / DWP structure effect comparisons over time. It should therefore be treated with caution and must be seen as an indication of cost, rather than the actual cost.

2020/21 figures impacted by COVID

Since 4^th July 2022, when collation of Mandatory Reconsideration figures commenced under the Risk Review process, there have been 174 Mandatory Reconsiderations with 1 case being revised.

The information requested is not collated centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

Civil penalties are not applied to Risk Review Cases.

The information requested is not collated centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

When preparing an appeal response the Department will review the decision, considering evidence previously submitted and any new evidence received with the appeal. The grounds for any revision will depend on the specifics of the individual case. Our overarching aim is to ensure that decisions which should be changed and so do not need to proceed to a hearing are changed at this stage. Where the change does not award the claimant the maximum they could be awarded by a tribunal the appeal will only be lapsed with the claimant’s agreement.

When preparing an appeal response the Department will review the decision, considering evidence previously submitted and any new evidence received with the appeal. The grounds for any revision will depend on the specifics of the individual case. Our overarching aim is to ensure that decisions which should be changed and so do not need to proceed to a hearing are changed at this stage. Where the change does not award the claimant the maximum they could be awarded by a tribunal the appeal will only be lapsed with the claimant’s agreement.

From 21st January 2022 when we started collating figures, we have completed 54 appeals. Breaking this figure down, 22 were lapsed and 14 overturned.

The balance is made up of 5 withdrawn appeals, 2 partially upheld appeals and 11 cases where the appeal was refused.

The number of complaints received by Capita and Independent Assessment Services (IAS) relating to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment process, and the amount of those complaints which were upheld, are shown in the tables below.

The number of complaints received by the assessment providers during this period, equates to less than 1% of the total number of assessments undertaken.

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

Please note

All volumes have been rounded to the nearest 10.

All the above data is derived from contractual management information produced by the assessment providers and may have been derived from a different data set than previously published.

We are unable to provide details of how many of these complaints were subsequently escalated to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). The PHSO usually only accept a complaint for investigation once it has exhausted the assessment providers complaint process, including the Independent Case Examiner (ICE). Although we cannot provide the number of complaints that are escalated to PHSO, I can confirm that they publish final decisions made on all accepted cases here.

Assessment providers (APs) have their own complaints process to deal with dissatisfaction about the service they provide. Complaints about the health assessment are directed to the provider, unless it is a mixed complaint concerning the service provided by both the department and the AP. Mixed complaints are handled by the department.

The three APs, Capita and Independent Assessment Services (IAS) for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Centre for Health and Disability Assessments (CHDA) for Work Capability Assessments (WCA), each have webpages explaining how claimants can contact them directly to make a complaint.

AP complaints are investigated by a customer relations manager or a case officer, who obtains all relevant evidence to inform a balanced and appropriate reply. If deficiencies are identified, they apologise and advise the department where this may have a bearing on the entitlement decision. This is known as a Tier 1 complaint response.

If a claimant is dissatisfied with the investigation and outcome of a Tier 1 complaint this can be looked at afresh by a senior manager who will review the initial investigation and obtain further evidence if appropriate. The outcome is then conveyed to the claimant by the AP and is referred to as a Tier 2 complaint response.

If, following Tier 1 and 2 of the complaints process, the claimant is still dissatisfied, they can contact the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) to look at their complaint.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

Information about the processes and actions taken regarding lapsed appeals can be found in the guidance attached.

To confirm: Where a decision is revised, and appeal lapsed, we will notify the claimant or their representative in writing setting out the reasons for the change of decision, and the relevant appeal rights. Where the revised decision does not give the claimant the level of award they were seeking on appeal the appeal will not be lapsed without agreement from the claimant and, where appropriate, their representative, either by telephone or in writing.

The revision (and lapse) can be on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour. Each case is considered on its own merits which of course means that the numbers lapsed will vary over time.

“I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to Question UIN PQ W 49219”

Details of the value of any financial compensation sought from assessment providers is commercially sensitive.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements, setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience. Contractual remedies are in place if the provider fails to deliver against the agreed service standards. Service credits are applied, where appropriate, in order to recover estimated financial loss to the department.

These performance regimes are published within the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment provider contracts, available on Contracts Finder - GOV.UK.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) manages the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) contracts robustly, and has a full set of service level agreements setting out our expectations for service delivery. We ensure a high standard is maintained, having an independent audit function that continually monitors performance, and provides feedback to assessment providers. Quality performance is also regularly reviewed through DWP and provider senior governance meetings at a national level, and in each of the provider areas.

The contracts allow us to recover any financial loss caused by poor performance, and we have the right to terminate the contract if there is sustained underperformance.

We are committed to continuously improving the assessment service and have reiterated this in the Shaping Future Support: The Health and Disability Green Paper. During the Green Paper consultation period, we explored ways in which we could improve the current system of assessments, including by:

• Introducing different ways to conduct assessments, such as introducing telephone and video assessments
• Reducing unnecessary assessments
• Improving our decisions, for example, by making sure that evidence is available earlier in the decision-making process
• Improving support for people with serious health conditions, including people nearing the end of their lives.

We are considering all the responses to the Green Paper proposals as we consider what future policy changes might look like, which we will set out in the White Paper later this year.

The department’s Health Transformation Programme (HTP) will deliver improvements to the health and disability benefits system, including proposals that stem from the Green Paper. Our ambition is to make the assessment process simpler, more user-friendly, easier to navigate and more joined-up for claimants, whilst delivering better value for money for taxpayers.

Providers also work continuously to drive improvements in assessment services. They have introduced new management processes to drive performance across their services, including new or enhanced systems of assessment report quality checks, to improve the quality of advice the department receives. In addition, PIP assessment reports have been redesigned to have clearer justifications which support improved benefit decision making.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) manages the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) contracts robustly, and has a full set of service level agreements setting out our expectations for service delivery. We ensure a high standard is maintained, having an independent audit function that continually monitors performance, and provides feedback to assessment providers. Quality performance is also regularly reviewed through DWP and provider senior governance meetings at a national level, and in each of the provider areas.

The contracts allow us to recover any financial loss caused by poor performance, and we have the right to terminate the contract if there is sustained underperformance.

We are committed to continuously improving the assessment service and have reiterated this in the Shaping Future Support: The Health and Disability Green Paper. During the Green Paper consultation period, we explored ways in which we could improve the current system of assessments, including by:

• Introducing different ways to conduct assessments, such as introducing telephone and video assessments
• Reducing unnecessary assessments
• Improving our decisions, for example, by making sure that evidence is available earlier in the decision-making process
• Improving support for people with serious health conditions, including people nearing the end of their lives.

We are considering all the responses to the Green Paper proposals as we consider what future policy changes might look like, which we will set out in the White Paper later this year.

The department’s Health Transformation Programme (HTP) will deliver improvements to the health and disability benefits system, including proposals that stem from the Green Paper. Our ambition is to make the assessment process simpler, more user-friendly, easier to navigate and more joined-up for claimants, whilst delivering better value for money for taxpayers.

Providers also work continuously to drive improvements in assessment services. They have introduced new management processes to drive performance across their services, including new or enhanced systems of assessment report quality checks, to improve the quality of advice the department receives. In addition, PIP assessment reports have been redesigned to have clearer justifications which support improved benefit decision making.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) manages the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) contracts robustly, and has a full set of service level agreements setting out our expectations for service delivery. We ensure a high standard is maintained, having an independent audit function that continually monitors performance, and provides feedback to assessment providers. Quality performance is also regularly reviewed through DWP and provider senior governance meetings at a national level, and in each of the provider areas.

The contracts allow us to recover any financial loss caused by poor performance, and we have the right to terminate the contract if there is sustained underperformance.

We are committed to continuously improving the assessment service and have reiterated this in the Shaping Future Support: The Health and Disability Green Paper. During the Green Paper consultation period, we explored ways in which we could improve the current system of assessments, including by:

• Introducing different ways to conduct assessments, such as introducing telephone and video assessments
• Reducing unnecessary assessments
• Improving our decisions, for example, by making sure that evidence is available earlier in the decision-making process
• Improving support for people with serious health conditions, including people nearing the end of their lives.

We are considering all the responses to the Green Paper proposals as we consider what future policy changes might look like, which we will set out in the White Paper later this year.

The department’s Health Transformation Programme (HTP) will deliver improvements to the health and disability benefits system, including proposals that stem from the Green Paper. Our ambition is to make the assessment process simpler, more user-friendly, easier to navigate and more joined-up for claimants, whilst delivering better value for money for taxpayers.

Providers also work continuously to drive improvements in assessment services. They have introduced new management processes to drive performance across their services, including new or enhanced systems of assessment report quality checks, to improve the quality of advice the department receives. In addition, PIP assessment reports have been redesigned to have clearer justifications which support improved benefit decision making.

Details of the value of any financial compensation sought from assessment providers is commercially sensitive.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements, setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience. Contractual remedies are in place if the provider fails to deliver against the agreed service standards. Service credits are applied, where appropriate, in order to recover estimated financial loss to the department.

These performance regimes are published within the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment provider contracts, available on Contracts Finder - GOV.UK.

Details of the value of any financial compensation sought from assessment providers is commercially sensitive.

Provider performance is measured across a range of service level agreements, setting out the department's expectations for service delivery. These include quality, performance delivery targets and customer experience. Contractual remedies are in place if the provider fails to deliver against the agreed service standards. Service credits are applied, where appropriate, in order to recover estimated financial loss to the department.

These performance regimes are published within the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment provider contracts, available on Contracts Finder - GOV.UK.

Referrals are made to the Risk Review Team for customers across the whole country and are not just specific to London.

Monthly statistics are not available.

The current total of customer cases determined by the Risk Review Team as still ineligible is 170,417 cases.

Of these cases some will be subject to review if the customer engages and provides evidence to verify their claim, but at this time, based on current information held, the customer is not entitled.

The cumulative total of customer cases reinstated following review is 7,221 cumulative cases.

The cumulative total of customer cases that have ever been suspended is 177,638 cases.

The above figures are based on internal management information and therefore have not been subject to the same degree of scrutiny and quality assurance as an official statistic.