Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what his department’s timeline is for deciding on the second wave of Modern Service Frameworks; and whether respiratory conditions will be considered.
Answered by Sharon Hodgson - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for City of Durham on 16 April 2026 to Question 125554.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what is the value of payments made to With-Profits Annuitants under the Equitable Life Payments Scheme to date.
Answered by Torsten Bell - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The previous Government allocated £1.5 billion to the Equitable Life Payment Scheme.
Of the £1.5 billion, £775 million was allocated to be paid as lump sums to with profits non-annuitants, and £625 million allocated to With-Profit-Annuitants (WPAs) to be paid annually for the duration of the annuity, as they were the most vulnerable group. This includes a £100 million contingency fund to ensure there is provision for annuitants, should they live longer than their actuarial forecast and brings the total allocated to WPAs up to £725 million.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether the Government will consider amending the Childcare Act 2006 to allow registered childminders to claim funded childcare hours for children to whom they are related, where all regulatory requirements are met.
Answered by Olivia Bailey - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)
Parents are free to choose the childcare that is right for them and their children, and childminders are not prevented from caring for related children. However, the restriction on funding relatives is set out in the Childcare Act (2006). Section 18(4) of this Act specifically excludes care provided for a child by a parent or other relative.
This approach avoids creating an incentive for adults to register to become childminders and being paid to look after related children that they are already looking after on an informal basis. Allowing childminders to receive funding for looking after related children would not be an effective use of public money.
A local authority can choose to fund a childminder providing childcare for a related child, but this would have to be from local authority funds independent of the Dedicated Schools Grant.
Although childminders cannot receive entitlements funding for related children, flexibilities within staff-to-child ratios can be used to enable childminders who are caring for related children to avoid limiting the income they can earn.
We have no plans to change this long-standing position at this time.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the potential impact of transitional arrangements on landfill gas workforce capacity prior to the closure of the Renewables Obligation in April 2027.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
Government recognises that the expiry of Renewables Obligation support from April 2027 could affect the commercial viability of generators in a sector which supports hundreds of jobs. As set out in the Methane Action Plan, Government is exploring the implementation of a long-term methane capture scheme with appropriate transitional arrangements.
DESNZ and Defra are giving careful consideration to the potential impact of proposals on workforce capacity and undertaking a rigorous value for money assessment. No final decisions have we been made and we will consult on the proposals later this year.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if she will consider giving open heritage homes an exemption from the council tax surcharge on second homes.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Council Tax second homes premium provides local leaders with the flexibility to increase Council Tax bills by 100% to address the local impact of second homes. The Government has published guidance setting out when a premium can apply and the statutory exceptions. The premium is not mandatory and there are no plans to introduce exceptions specifically for heritage homes. Councils have powers to introduce local exceptions or provide discounts where they consider this appropriate.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of including receipt of council tax reduction as part of the eligibility criteria of the Warm Home Discount.
Answered by Martin McCluskey - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
Eligibility for the Warm Home Discount in England and Wales is based on receipt of a qualifying means tested benefit and being named on the energy account with a participating supplier. Receipt of Council Tax Reduction is not used as an eligibility criterion. Council Tax Reduction schemes vary across local authorities, and there is no central record of recipients, which prevents consistent eligibility and effective data matching. Households not eligible for the Warm Home Discount rebate may still receive help through Warm Home Discount funded Industry Initiatives, which can provide energy advice, debt support, financial assistance or minor energy efficiency measures, including for non-customers.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of abolishing VAT on defibrillators.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Government currently provides VAT reliefs to aid the purchase of defibrillators. For example, when an Automated External Defibrillator is purchased with funds provided by a charity and then donated to an eligible body, no VAT is charged. Furthermore, all state schools in England have been fitted with AEDs.
Tax breaks reduce the revenue available for vital public services and must represent value for money for the taxpayer. Exceptions to the standard rate have always been limited and balanced against affordability considerations.
A key consideration for any potential new VAT relief is whether savings would be passed on to the consumer. Evidence suggests that businesses only partially pass on any savings from lower VAT rates.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment she has made of the adequacy of the legal framework for privately owned e-scooters; and whether she plans to (a) introduce a scheme for licensing, registration and insurance for private e-scooter use and (b) ban the sale of converter kits or high-speed e-scooters.
Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The Government recognises that the widespread illegal use of e-scooters is a serious issue. That is why we have committed to pursuing legislative reform for micromobility vehicles when parliamentary time allows.
No decisions have been made on licensing, registration and insurance, but we will consult on any new regulations, including on the use of converter kits, before they come into force.
We understand the importance of providing a clear legislative timeline and we are working with colleagues across Government to deliver this.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of adjusting lump-sum compensation payments under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme to reflect inflation where payments are delayed for several years.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Individuals applying for compensation from IBCA have the choice between receiving their award as a single lump sum payment, or as a series of periodical payments over a 5, 10, or 25 year period. The compensation scheme indexes all future periodical payments to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) to ensure that these payments hold value against inflation and provide parity between applicants that choose a lump sum or periodical payments.
The Government has consulted on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme, to gather views on how the Government intends to implement the Inquiry’s recommendations. The consultation closed on 22 January. The Government is considering the responses to the consultation carefully, and we will publish our response to the consultation, which will set out our final decisions on the compensation scheme, within 12 weeks of the closing date.
The delivery of compensation is a matter for IBCA, and as of 10 February, 3,153 people have received an offer of compensation, totalling over £2.5 billion. IBCA has now opened its service to the people who are infected but not registered with an IBSS, as well as to the first claims from affected people and from estates on behalf of deceased infected people.
Asked by: Lizzi Collinge (Labour - Morecambe and Lunesdale)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether the Government will consider implementing legal requirement for drivers to stop or report collisions involving domestic pets such as cats.
Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
I understand the distress of owners who lose beloved pets and it is a great source of worry and uncertainty when they are lost.
There are no plans to amend section 170 of the Road Traffic Act to make it mandatory for drivers to report road collisions involving cats.
Under section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a driver is required to stop and report a collision involving specified animals including horses, cattle, asses, mules, sheep, pigs, goats or dogs, but not cats or wild animals. This requirement arises from their status as working animals rather than as domestic pets.
Although there is no obligation to report all animal deaths on roads, drivers should, if possible, make enquiries to ascertain the owner of domestic animals, such as cats, and advise them of the situation.
Having a law making it a requirement to report road collisions involving cats would be very difficult to enforce and it is not clear what difference it would make to the behaviour of drivers, who are aware that they have run over a cat and do not report it.