Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will take steps to increase police powers to tackle illegal e-scooter use.

Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Government is committed to supporting the police in tackling the illegal and anti-social use of e-scooters. Privately owned e-scooters are classed as motor vehicles and are illegal to use on public roads and other public places unless they comply with the relevant legal requirements such as having appropriate insurance, driving licences, number plates, and helmets.

Police already have powers to stop, seize and, where appropriate, dispose of illegally used e-scooters, as well as to enforce offences relating to careless or dangerous use.

The Government has reduced and aligned vehicle disposal timeframes, enabling vehicles to be disposed of after seven days. In the Crime and Policing Act 2026 we strengthened police powers to tackle vehicles used in an anti-social manner, including e-scooters, by removing the requirement to issue a warning before seizure. These measures will enable officers to take swifter action against those using e-scooters illegally and in a way that causes alarm, distress or nuisance to the public.

The Home Office continues to work closely with policing partners and the Department for Transport to support effective enforcement and improve public safety.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps are being taken to support police enforcement of illegal e-scooter use.

Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Government is committed to supporting the police in tackling the illegal and anti-social use of e-scooters. Privately owned e-scooters are classed as motor vehicles and are illegal to use on public roads and other public places unless they comply with the relevant legal requirements such as having appropriate insurance, driving licences, number plates, and helmets.

Police already have powers to stop, seize and, where appropriate, dispose of illegally used e-scooters, as well as to enforce offences relating to careless or dangerous use.

The Government has reduced and aligned vehicle disposal timeframes, enabling vehicles to be disposed of after seven days. In the Crime and Policing Act 2026 we strengthened police powers to tackle vehicles used in an anti-social manner, including e-scooters, by removing the requirement to issue a warning before seizure. These measures will enable officers to take swifter action against those using e-scooters illegally and in a way that causes alarm, distress or nuisance to the public.

The Home Office continues to work closely with policing partners and the Department for Transport to support effective enforcement and improve public safety.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what estimate his Department has made of the proportion of the STFC's projected £162 million deficit attributable directly to (a) foreign exchange rate fluctuations, (b) international subscription commitments, and (c) energy price increases.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Within the funding allocations set by Government, UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and its constituent councils are responsible for managing their budgets, balancing pressures across their portfolios and ensuring their activities remain financially sustainable.

The Science and Technology Facilities Council identified a range of pressures affecting the affordability of its portfolio, including inflation, staffing and energy costs, foreign exchange movements, international subscription commitments and the costs associated with an expanded portfolio of activity. UKRI and STFC undertook a prioritisation exercise to return STFC to a sustainable financial position while protecting key capabilities. While UKRI has considered the contribution of individual cost pressures to STFC’s affordability challenge, the projected funding gap reflects the cumulative impact of multiple factors and UKRI does not routinely report or publish a breakdown of the gap by individual cost driver.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment has his Department made of the efficiency of the roll-out of the Crisis and Resilience Fund.

Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Department has worked closely with local authorities throughout implementation of the Crisis and Resilience Fund. Authorities were required to submit delivery plans by 01 July 2026 and are required to provide management information every six months, enabling the Department to monitor delivery and identify where additional support may be required.

The Department is also commissioning an independent national evaluation, which will assess the Fund’s delivery, impact and value for money.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of operational budget reductions on particle physics and astronomy research, relative to other research disciplines across UKRI; and for what reason operational funding reductions were designated at a level of up to 30%.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), as part of UK Research & Innovation (UKRI), completed an evidence-based prioritisation exercise to ensure its portfolio remains financially sustainable and focused on the highest-priority scientific opportunities, major international commitments and multidisciplinary facilities. The exercise considered scientific excellence, long-term research impact, strategic importance, value for money and preservation of capability. Following community engagement and expert advice, the PPAN budget is expected to decrease by 2.7% over four years, while major multidisciplinary facilities remain operational and internationally important commitments are protected. STFC grant funding for Particle Physics, Astronomy and Nuclear Physics (PPAN) postdoctoral researchers has been maintained at 2025/26 levels, while PhD studentships and fellowships were also protected.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, how many external independent academic peer reviews were commissioned to inform the Science and Technology Facilities Council's 2026–2030 prioritisation outcomes; and if he will publish these review findings.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Science and Technology Facilities Council's (STFC) prioritisation process was informed by extensive engagement with the research community, expert advisory bodies and specialist staff. This included more than 10 engagement events, written input from 48 project leads, and more than 30 Science Board, Council and expert advisory panel meetings. Science Board (Particle Physics, Astronomy and Nuclear Physics) completed a comprehensive appraisal of options based on information provided by individual projects, while Science Board (Facilities and Laboratories) and the cross-UKRI Facilities Strategic Advisory Group were consulted on facilities options. No external independent academic peer reviews were commissioned specifically for this prioritisation exercise. Science Board advice is provided confidentially and is not routinely published.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what comparative cost-benefit analyses were conducted between maintaining domestic scientific infrastructure, such as the e-MERLIN array, and funding international subscriptions; and whether steps were taken during the prioritisation process to measure short-term inflation against long-term scientific capability changes.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC) undertook a structured assessment of different funding options across STFC's portfolio. This considered scientific excellence, long-term research impact, strategic importance to the UK, international leadership, value for money and the preservation of capabilities that would be difficult or impossible to recreate if lost. The prioritisation process considered a range of funding scenarios and the implications of increasing operational costs, including inflation and foreign exchange pressures. Major international subscriptions continue to be protected, while decisions across the wider portfolio were taken following extensive engagement with the research community.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of the planned cessation of STFC funding for e-MERLIN and Jodrell Bank scientific operations by April 2028 on the number of highly skilled jobs, technical expertise, and post-doctoral research positions.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Jodrell Bank Observatory is not closing and remains an important UK science asset. UK Research and Innovation funds specific programmes, including the e-MERLIN radio telescope network, rather than the Observatory site itself. Current e-MERLIN funding remains in place until 31 March 2028. The prioritisation exercise considered scientific excellence, long-term impact, strategic importance, value for money and preservation of capabilities. The Government recognises the importance of highly skilled technical and scientific expertise and STFC will be protecting PPAN (Particle Physics, Astronomy and Nuclear Physics) grant postdoctoral funding maintained at 2025/26 levels, alongside PhD studentships and fellowships.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether she (a) has reviewed and (b) plans to review the (i) provision and (ii) location of (A) inpatient and (B) outpatient health services in South Hertfordshire.

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

We recognise the challenges significant housing and population growth can place on primary care health infrastructure. The 10-Year Health Plan sets out our ambition to create a Neighbourhood Health Service, shifting care from hospitals into communities and bringing more integrated, preventative care closer to people’s homes. The 10 Year Capital Plan, published in July, sets out how we will support delivery of that vision through capital investment.

The Government is investing over approximately £200 million of Primary Care Utilisation and Modernisation funding to tackle historic underinvestment into the primary care estate. This funding continues to support upgrades to existing general practice surgeries, allowing practices to offer more appointments.

A further £200 million will support upgrading the existing estate to deliver approximately 50 neighbourhood health centres through upgrades. We announced Wave 1 of Neighbourhood Health Centre upgrade schemes in March 2026, with 27 sites across England selected to bring care closer to home. We are also assessing proposals for a pipeline of new build neighbourhood health centres.

Proposals for future waves of neighbourhood health centres are currently being assessed against published criteria, as set out in the Neighbourhood Health Centre Guidance, with final decisions on future schemes yet to be confirmed. Further information on the criteria is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/neighbourhood-health-centres/

Projects that meet the criteria will be invited to develop detailed business cases before any final funding decisions are taken. Rollout for neighbourhood health centres will start in the areas of greatest need, with investment prioritised where it can have the greatest impact and address material gaps in community and neighbourhood health infrastructure.

Integrated care boards (ICBs), like the Central East ICB which covers the South Hertfordshire area, are responsible for commissioning, including planning, securing, and monitoring, services within their health systems through delegated responsibility from NHS England. The National Health Service has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient medical services, including general practice, in each local area. ICBs should evaluate the needs of the populations for which they are responsible and plan service provision as required.

The Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government to determine how the developer contributions system can be strengthened and improved to support the planning and delivery of the required social infrastructure in areas of population growth.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what guidance and timetable her Department has provided to Integrated Care Boards regarding the allocation of General Practice capital funding for primary care infrastructure developments.

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

We recognise the challenges significant housing and population growth can place on primary care health infrastructure. The 10-Year Health Plan sets out our ambition to create a Neighbourhood Health Service, shifting care from hospitals into communities and bringing more integrated, preventative care closer to people’s homes. The 10 Year Capital Plan, published in July, sets out how we will support delivery of that vision through capital investment.

The Government is investing over approximately £200 million of Primary Care Utilisation and Modernisation funding to tackle historic underinvestment into the primary care estate. This funding continues to support upgrades to existing general practice surgeries, allowing practices to offer more appointments.

A further £200 million will support upgrading the existing estate to deliver approximately 50 neighbourhood health centres through upgrades. We announced Wave 1 of Neighbourhood Health Centre upgrade schemes in March 2026, with 27 sites across England selected to bring care closer to home. We are also assessing proposals for a pipeline of new build neighbourhood health centres.

Proposals for future waves of neighbourhood health centres are currently being assessed against published criteria, as set out in the Neighbourhood Health Centre Guidance, with final decisions on future schemes yet to be confirmed. Further information on the criteria is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/neighbourhood-health-centres/

Projects that meet the criteria will be invited to develop detailed business cases before any final funding decisions are taken. Rollout for neighbourhood health centres will start in the areas of greatest need, with investment prioritised where it can have the greatest impact and address material gaps in community and neighbourhood health infrastructure.

Integrated care boards (ICBs), like the Central East ICB which covers the South Hertfordshire area, are responsible for commissioning, including planning, securing, and monitoring, services within their health systems through delegated responsibility from NHS England. The National Health Service has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient medical services, including general practice, in each local area. ICBs should evaluate the needs of the populations for which they are responsible and plan service provision as required.

The Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government to determine how the developer contributions system can be strengthened and improved to support the planning and delivery of the required social infrastructure in areas of population growth.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to support primary care networks in increasing patient capacity and reducing waiting times for GP appointments in towns which are increasing in population.

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

We recognise the challenges significant housing and population growth can place on primary care health infrastructure. The 10-Year Health Plan sets out our ambition to create a Neighbourhood Health Service, shifting care from hospitals into communities and bringing more integrated, preventative care closer to people’s homes. The 10 Year Capital Plan, published in July, sets out how we will support delivery of that vision through capital investment.

The Government is investing over approximately £200 million of Primary Care Utilisation and Modernisation funding to tackle historic underinvestment into the primary care estate. This funding continues to support upgrades to existing general practice surgeries, allowing practices to offer more appointments.

A further £200 million will support upgrading the existing estate to deliver approximately 50 neighbourhood health centres through upgrades. We announced Wave 1 of Neighbourhood Health Centre upgrade schemes in March 2026, with 27 sites across England selected to bring care closer to home. We are also assessing proposals for a pipeline of new build neighbourhood health centres.

Proposals for future waves of neighbourhood health centres are currently being assessed against published criteria, as set out in the Neighbourhood Health Centre Guidance, with final decisions on future schemes yet to be confirmed. Further information on the criteria is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/neighbourhood-health-centres/

Projects that meet the criteria will be invited to develop detailed business cases before any final funding decisions are taken. Rollout for neighbourhood health centres will start in the areas of greatest need, with investment prioritised where it can have the greatest impact and address material gaps in community and neighbourhood health infrastructure.

Integrated care boards (ICBs), like the Central East ICB which covers the South Hertfordshire area, are responsible for commissioning, including planning, securing, and monitoring, services within their health systems through delegated responsibility from NHS England. The National Health Service has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient medical services, including general practice, in each local area. ICBs should evaluate the needs of the populations for which they are responsible and plan service provision as required.

The Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government to determine how the developer contributions system can be strengthened and improved to support the planning and delivery of the required social infrastructure in areas of population growth.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what criteria her Department will use to select locations for new Neighbourhood Health Centres, and in what way priority will be given to areas with limited primary care capacity.

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

We recognise the challenges significant housing and population growth can place on primary care health infrastructure. The 10-Year Health Plan sets out our ambition to create a Neighbourhood Health Service, shifting care from hospitals into communities and bringing more integrated, preventative care closer to people’s homes. The 10 Year Capital Plan, published in July, sets out how we will support delivery of that vision through capital investment.

The Government is investing over approximately £200 million of Primary Care Utilisation and Modernisation funding to tackle historic underinvestment into the primary care estate. This funding continues to support upgrades to existing general practice surgeries, allowing practices to offer more appointments.

A further £200 million will support upgrading the existing estate to deliver approximately 50 neighbourhood health centres through upgrades. We announced Wave 1 of Neighbourhood Health Centre upgrade schemes in March 2026, with 27 sites across England selected to bring care closer to home. We are also assessing proposals for a pipeline of new build neighbourhood health centres.

Proposals for future waves of neighbourhood health centres are currently being assessed against published criteria, as set out in the Neighbourhood Health Centre Guidance, with final decisions on future schemes yet to be confirmed. Further information on the criteria is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/neighbourhood-health-centres/

Projects that meet the criteria will be invited to develop detailed business cases before any final funding decisions are taken. Rollout for neighbourhood health centres will start in the areas of greatest need, with investment prioritised where it can have the greatest impact and address material gaps in community and neighbourhood health infrastructure.

Integrated care boards (ICBs), like the Central East ICB which covers the South Hertfordshire area, are responsible for commissioning, including planning, securing, and monitoring, services within their health systems through delegated responsibility from NHS England. The National Health Service has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient medical services, including general practice, in each local area. ICBs should evaluate the needs of the populations for which they are responsible and plan service provision as required.

The Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government to determine how the developer contributions system can be strengthened and improved to support the planning and delivery of the required social infrastructure in areas of population growth.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to ensure Integrated Care Boards receive adequate capital funding to upgrade and replace primary care facilities in high-growth communities.

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

We recognise the challenges significant housing and population growth can place on primary care health infrastructure. The 10-Year Health Plan sets out our ambition to create a Neighbourhood Health Service, shifting care from hospitals into communities and bringing more integrated, preventative care closer to people’s homes. The 10 Year Capital Plan, published in July, sets out how we will support delivery of that vision through capital investment.

The Government is investing over approximately £200 million of Primary Care Utilisation and Modernisation funding to tackle historic underinvestment into the primary care estate. This funding continues to support upgrades to existing general practice surgeries, allowing practices to offer more appointments.

A further £200 million will support upgrading the existing estate to deliver approximately 50 neighbourhood health centres through upgrades. We announced Wave 1 of Neighbourhood Health Centre upgrade schemes in March 2026, with 27 sites across England selected to bring care closer to home. We are also assessing proposals for a pipeline of new build neighbourhood health centres.

Proposals for future waves of neighbourhood health centres are currently being assessed against published criteria, as set out in the Neighbourhood Health Centre Guidance, with final decisions on future schemes yet to be confirmed. Further information on the criteria is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/neighbourhood-health-centres/

Projects that meet the criteria will be invited to develop detailed business cases before any final funding decisions are taken. Rollout for neighbourhood health centres will start in the areas of greatest need, with investment prioritised where it can have the greatest impact and address material gaps in community and neighbourhood health infrastructure.

Integrated care boards (ICBs), like the Central East ICB which covers the South Hertfordshire area, are responsible for commissioning, including planning, securing, and monitoring, services within their health systems through delegated responsibility from NHS England. The National Health Service has a statutory duty to ensure there are sufficient medical services, including general practice, in each local area. ICBs should evaluate the needs of the populations for which they are responsible and plan service provision as required.

The Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government to determine how the developer contributions system can be strengthened and improved to support the planning and delivery of the required social infrastructure in areas of population growth.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what statutory requirements are placed on Home Office accommodation providers to notify local planning authorities before acquiring or leasing Class C3 dwellinghouses for conversion into multi-occupancy asylum accommodation; and whether such providers are required to comply with local Article 4 Directions restricting Class C4 HMO conversions.

Answered by Anna Turley - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Home Office records information provided by accommodation providers on the type of accommodation used within the asylum accommodation estate, including whether a property is recorded as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). However, the Home Office does not currently hold centrally collated information identifying the number of asylum dispersal accommodation that meet the physical definition of an HMO and are located within local authority subject to an Article 4 Direction.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many residential properties operate as dispersed accommodation for asylum seekers in England meet the physical definition of a HMO for which the latest data is available; and how many are located in local authority areas subject to an active Article 4 Direction for which the latest data is available.

Answered by Anna Turley - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Home Office records information provided by accommodation providers on the type of accommodation used within the asylum accommodation estate, including whether a property is recorded as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO). However, the Home Office does not currently hold centrally collated information identifying the number of asylum dispersal accommodation that meet the physical definition of an HMO and are located within local authority subject to an Article 4 Direction.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what requirement or guidance exists under the Victim’s Code to notify victims of child sexual abuse, or their guardians, when a defendant’s statutory two-year Supervision Order is due to lapse; and what reassurances are provided regarding ongoing public protection measures.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

The Victims’ Code sets out the minimum standards of information and support that criminal justice agencies must provide to victims. This includes rights to information about the investigation and prosecution, the outcome of the case and, in specified circumstances, information about an offender following conviction.

A Supervision Order is imposed by the court for a fixed period and expires automatically when that period ends. The Victim’s code does not provide a separate right to notification when a Supervision Order is due to expire.

The expiry of a Supervision Order is the automatic conclusion of an order already set by the court, rather than a new decision or change in the offender’s custodial status, no separate right exists under the Victims’ Code to notify victims, or their family members or guardians, when a defendant’s Supervision Order is due to lapse. It should be distinguished from other protection measures which may be in place and would continue to apply independently of the supervision order.

Any ongoing arrangements to manage risk and protect the public are considered by those responsible for overseeing the Order.

More widely, the Government recognises that unfitness to plead cases may be difficult to understand as they do not follow the normal trial and sentencing route and we are considering how the court procedure can be made clearer and more supportive for victims and their families.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when his Department plans to publish the initial findings of its evaluation of the Crisis and Resilience Fund; and whether this evaluation will include local authority-level and constituency-level data on parcel reliance and hardship applications.

Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The national evaluation of the Crisis and Resilience Fund is being commissioned. Plans for the publication of initial findings will be finalised in due course. The evaluation will assess delivery, impact and value for money, including how the Fund contributes to reducing the need for emergency food parcels. This will be looking at the fund as a whole, rather than at Local Authority or constituency level.

Separately, management information is being collected at the local authority level on spend, awards and refusals, which includes data on food support and reducing the need for emergency food parcels. This information is not collected at parliamentary constituency level.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment has his Department made of the effectiveness of the Crisis and Resilience Fund in reducing food poverty.

Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Crisis and Resilience Fund launched in April 2026. No assessment of its effectiveness in reducing food poverty or dependency on emergency food has yet been made.

The Department will assess the Fund through management information collected from local authorities and an independent national evaluation. This will examine the Fund's delivery, impact and value for money, including its contribution to reducing reliance on emergency food support.

The Department also publishes annual statistics on food insecurity and food bank use, which provide a wider measure of progress against the Government’s commitment to tackle poverty and reduce dependence on emergency food support. These are available here.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what specific performance metrics his Department is using to evaluate the effectiveness of the Crisis and Resilience Fund in meeting the Government's commitment to end mass dependence on emergency food.

Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The Crisis and Resilience Fund launched in April 2026. No assessment of its effectiveness in reducing food poverty or dependency on emergency food has yet been made.

The Department will assess the Fund through management information collected from local authorities and an independent national evaluation. This will examine the Fund's delivery, impact and value for money, including its contribution to reducing reliance on emergency food support.

The Department also publishes annual statistics on food insecurity and food bank use, which provide a wider measure of progress against the Government’s commitment to tackle poverty and reduce dependence on emergency food support. These are available here.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the statutory two-year maximum duration of a Supervision Order issued under Schedule 1A to the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 as a mechanism to protect public safety.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Generally speaking, it is important to distinguish the two-year limit of a Supervision Order from other protection measures that may apply in these cases. The end of the two- year period does not by itself determine whether an individual is eligible for management through other public protection frameworks beyond this timeline. Consideration may be given to MAPPA management where the relevant risk criteria are satisfied and probation and Local Authorities are encouraged to work together to provide multi agency support through existing MAPPA arrangements where appropriate.

The Government recognises that the law relating to unfitness to plead needs updating. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals available to courts and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

The Ministry of Justice does not currently hold data on the number of Supervision Orders that reach their statutory two-year maximum.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements for supervising individuals who have been found by a court to have done the act in a Trial of the Facts for qualifying sexual offences, but who reside in the community under a supervision order rather than a hospital order.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Individuals subject to a Supervision Order can be considered for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) where the relevant eligibility and risk criteria are met, but being made subject to a Supervision Order itself does not automatically qualify for MAPPA management.

Accordingly, the expiry of a Supervision Order does not itself determine whether an individual remains subject to MAPPA. The period for which an individual remains under MAPPA depends on the basis on which they qualify for those arrangements, and relevant agencies assess and manage the risk posed through the MAPPA framework.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department takes to ensure that people found during a Trial of the Facts to have committed qualifying sexual offences remain actively managed under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements after their statutory two-year Supervision Order expires.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Individuals subject to a Supervision Order can be considered for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) where the relevant eligibility and risk criteria are met, but being made subject to a Supervision Order itself does not automatically qualify for MAPPA management.

Accordingly, the expiry of a Supervision Order does not itself determine whether an individual remains subject to MAPPA. The period for which an individual remains under MAPPA depends on the basis on which they qualify for those arrangements, and relevant agencies assess and manage the risk posed through the MAPPA framework.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the operational effectiveness of multi-agency arrangements for ensuring that individuals found to have done the act in a Trial of the Facts for qualifying sexual offences are automatically placed on the Sex Offenders Register and the Children's Barred List.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Individuals subject to a Supervision Order can be considered for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) where the relevant eligibility and risk criteria are met, but being made subject to a Supervision Order itself does not automatically qualify for MAPPA management.

Accordingly, the expiry of a Supervision Order does not itself determine whether an individual remains subject to MAPPA. The period for which an individual remains under MAPPA depends on the basis on which they qualify for those arrangements, and relevant agencies assess and manage the risk posed through the MAPPA framework.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of a Supervision Order issued under Schedule 1A to the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 reaching its statutory two-year maximum limit in cases involving child sexual abuse on public safety.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Generally speaking, it is important to distinguish the two-year limit of a Supervision Order from other protection measures that may apply in these cases. The end of the two- year period does not by itself determine whether an individual is eligible for management through other public protection frameworks beyond this timeline. Consideration may be given to MAPPA management where the relevant risk criteria are satisfied and probation and Local Authorities are encouraged to work together to provide multi agency support through existing MAPPA arrangements where appropriate.

The Government recognises that the law relating to unfitness to plead needs updating. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals available to courts and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

The Ministry of Justice does not currently hold data on the number of Supervision Orders that reach their statutory two-year maximum.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate his Department has made of the number of Supervision Orders issued under Schedule 1A to the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 following a Trial of the Facts that reached their statutory two-year maximum limit in each of the last five years.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Generally speaking, it is important to distinguish the two-year limit of a Supervision Order from other protection measures that may apply in these cases. The end of the two- year period does not by itself determine whether an individual is eligible for management through other public protection frameworks beyond this timeline. Consideration may be given to MAPPA management where the relevant risk criteria are satisfied and probation and Local Authorities are encouraged to work together to provide multi agency support through existing MAPPA arrangements where appropriate.

The Government recognises that the law relating to unfitness to plead needs updating. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals available to courts and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

The Ministry of Justice does not currently hold data on the number of Supervision Orders that reach their statutory two-year maximum.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has reviewed the statutory two-year maximum duration for Supervision Orders made under the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

Generally speaking, it is important to distinguish the two-year limit of a Supervision Order from other protection measures that may apply in these cases. The end of the two- year period does not by itself determine whether an individual is eligible for management through other public protection frameworks beyond this timeline. Consideration may be given to MAPPA management where the relevant risk criteria are satisfied and probation and Local Authorities are encouraged to work together to provide multi agency support through existing MAPPA arrangements where appropriate.

The Government recognises that the law relating to unfitness to plead needs updating. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals available to courts and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

The Ministry of Justice does not currently hold data on the number of Supervision Orders that reach their statutory two-year maximum.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to bring forward legislative proposals to reform the legal criteria for unfitness to stand trial under the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964; and what assessment he has made of the suitability of the 1836 Pritchard criteria when evaluating defendants with complex learning disabilities.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

The Government agrees that this area of law needs to be updated. The Law Commission reviewed the law on unfitness to plead, and the Government has accepted the majority of its recommendations including a revised test for unfitness to plead.

The Government is actively considering how best to take these reforms forward, alongside potential changes to the defence of insanity, which is also being considered by the Law Commission. This is a complex area of law and it is important that any future reforms are considered carefully to ensure that the legislation is coherent, workable and provides protections for defendants, victims and the public.

As set out in the answer of 7 July 2026 to UIN 13835, the Ministry of Justice does not hold specific data on trials which do not go ahead because the defendant was found unfit to stand trial. The Ministry of Justice routinely publishes data on outcomes in the criminal courts; however, this does not currently allow us to identify whether a trial did not proceed specifically because the defendant was found unfit to stand trial. Our Satiations regularly reviewing the content of publications to ensure they meet the needs of users in line with our commitments to the code of practice

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the answer of 7 July 2026, to UIN 13835, if he will make it his policy to keep data on trials which do not go ahead because the defendant was found unfit to stand trial.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Firstly, it was constructive to meet with you and your constituent Katherine Prior to discuss your concerns around the law on fitness to plead and the consequences which can flow from a finding that an individual is unfit to plead. As I indicated in the meeting together with my officials, we will revert to you in relation to the important issues which you raised.

The Government agrees that this area of law needs to be updated. The Law Commission reviewed the law on unfitness to plead, and the Government has accepted the majority of its recommendations including a revised test for unfitness to plead.

The Government is actively considering how best to take these reforms forward, alongside potential changes to the defence of insanity, which is also being considered by the Law Commission. This is a complex area of law and it is important that any future reforms are considered carefully to ensure that the legislation is coherent, workable and provides protections for defendants, victims and the public.

As set out in the answer of 7 July 2026 to UIN 13835, the Ministry of Justice does not hold specific data on trials which do not go ahead because the defendant was found unfit to stand trial. The Ministry of Justice routinely publishes data on outcomes in the criminal courts; however, this does not currently allow us to identify whether a trial did not proceed specifically because the defendant was found unfit to stand trial. Our Satiations regularly reviewing the content of publications to ensure they meet the needs of users in line with our commitments to the code of practice

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to expand the provision of court registered intermediaries and special assistance mechanisms to enable defendants with learning difficulties or neurodivergent conditions to participate effectively in criminal trials, in line with recommendations made by the Law Commission on unfitness to plead.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The Ministry of Justice is committed to ensuring that defendants with learning difficulties, neurodivergent conditions and other communication needs are able to participate effectively in criminal proceedings.

We have carefully considered the recommendations made by the Law Commission in its 2016 report on unfitness to plead. In 2023, the Government's response noted that Recommendation 10.5 has been addressed through the introduction of the HMCTS Appointed Intermediary Service (HAIS) in April 2022.

HAIS provides intermediary support for defendants in criminal proceedings and all parties in civil, family and tribunal cases. Intermediaries are impartial communication specialists who assess an individual’s communication needs and make recommendations to the court on reasonable adjustments that may be required to support effective participation. The judiciary then determines what support is necessary based on the individual’s needs.

We recognise the important role that intermediary support measures can play in enabling fair trials. In 2024, the Ministry of Justice established a project to expand the current intermediary provision by developing a Justice-wide Intermediary Service to strengthen the consistency, quality and availability of intermediary services across the justice sector. This project is expected to launch a procurement exercise in spring 2027 with the intention of the new service being available by the end of 2028.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, whether his Department considered the potential merits of central foreign exchange hedging mechanisms for UKRI’s international scientific subscriptions to protect domestic particle physics and astronomy grant budgets.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) already uses a hedging and exchange-rate policy, aligned with departmental and HM Treasury policies and frameworks, to manage financial risks associated with UK membership of large international research infrastructure like CERN. The only hedging arrangements permitted by UKRI’s policy are forward-buy contracts with the Bank of England. This approach provides greater certainty over future subscription costs and smooths short term volatility. However, it does not protect against potential global economic pressures, nor long-term unfavourable currency movements which are priced into the Bank of England contracts.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the legal mechanisms available to Crown Courts when an individual breaches the requirements of a Supervision Order made under Schedule 1A to the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964; and how many such orders were revoked or amended due to non-compliance in each of the last five years.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Supervision orders are used in cases where compulsory hospitalisation are deemed unnecessary by the court, but some ongoing support and oversight are required in the community. The legislation provides for supervision by a social worker or probation offices.

Being subject to a Supervision Order does not in itself qualify an individual for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Where an individual is subject to the relevant notification requirements, they may also qualify for MAPPA management independently of the Supervision Order.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of Supervision Orders revoked or amended due to non-compliance.

As we discussed in our recent meeting, the Government recognises the law on unfitness to plead needs to be updated. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to review Schedule 1A to the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 to establish alternative, non-custodial statutory enforcement powers for supervising officers when an unfit defendant consistently non-complies with mandated treatment or residence conditions.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Supervision orders are used in cases where compulsory hospitalisation are deemed unnecessary by the court, but some ongoing support and oversight are required in the community. The legislation provides for supervision by a social worker or probation offices.

Being subject to a Supervision Order does not in itself qualify an individual for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Where an individual is subject to the relevant notification requirements, they may also qualify for MAPPA management independently of the Supervision Order.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of Supervision Orders revoked or amended due to non-compliance.

As we discussed in our recent meeting, the Government recognises the law on unfitness to plead needs to be updated. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the level of the public protection risks arising from the statutory restriction that a breach of a Supervision Order issued following a Trial of the Facts cannot result in criminal sanctions, fines, or custodial recall due to the defendant’s lack of legal capacity.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Supervision orders are used in cases where compulsory hospitalisation are deemed unnecessary by the court, but some ongoing support and oversight are required in the community. The legislation provides for supervision by a social worker or probation offices.

Being subject to a Supervision Order does not in itself qualify an individual for management under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). Where an individual is subject to the relevant notification requirements, they may also qualify for MAPPA management independently of the Supervision Order.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of Supervision Orders revoked or amended due to non-compliance.

As we discussed in our recent meeting, the Government recognises the law on unfitness to plead needs to be updated. We are considering how to implement reforms proposed by the Law Commission including those which will extend the range of disposals and provide more effective powers to protect victims and the public in these cases.

Question to the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade:

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, what criteria, quantitative metrics, and scientific impact assessments were used in UK Research and Innovation's recent evidence-based prioritisation process; and if he will publish the risk assessments and scoring methodologies used to evaluate the impact of these decisions on university physics departments.

Answered by Chris McDonald - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

UK Research and Innovation and the Science and Technology Facilities Council undertook a structured assessment of funding options across STFC's portfolio. The process considered scientific excellence, long-term research impact, strategic importance to the UK, international leadership, value for money and the preservation of capabilities that would be difficult or impossible to recreate if lost. Decisions were informed by more than 10 engagement events, written input from 48 project leads and more than 30 Science Board, Council and expert advisory panel meetings. Recommendations were reviewed and endorsed by the UKRI Executive Committee and approved by the UKRI Board. Information on the prioritisation process and outcomes has been published by UKRI.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment her Department has made of the adequacy of a Sexual Harm Prevention Order in protecting victims.

Answered by Satvir Kaur - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPOs) are civil orders that are available to the police, on conviction or application to the court, to manage the risk posed by registered sex offenders and those who pose a risk of sexual harm.

SHPOs can be applied to anyone convicted or cautioned for a sexual or violent offence, including where offences are committed overseas. It can place a range of restrictions and/or requirements on individuals depending on the nature of the case, such as limiting their internet use, preventing travel abroad or attending a drug or alcohol treatment or behaviour change programme. Courts may impose prohibitions tailored to the offender's behaviour and assessed risk. Breach is a criminal offence punishable by a maximum of 5 years’ imprisonment.

The Government has awarded £99,367 through the Cabinet Office's Evaluation Accelerator Fund to support an evaluation of the effectiveness of SHPOs in reducing reoffending and improving offender management.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what guidance her Department issues to police forces on managing individuals subject to both a Supervision Order and a Sexual Harm Prevention Order (SHPO) who breach their SHPO conditions but are legally unfit to undergo standard criminal prosecution for that breach.

Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Home Secretary publishes statutory guidance for the police in relation to the exercise by them of their powers with regard to Sexual Harm Prevention Orders (SHPOs) and interim SHPOs.

Additionally, the College of Policing publishes Authorised Professional Practice for officers involved in the management of sexual (and violent) offenders.

Individuals convicted of sexual offences subject to notification requirements and SHPOs are managed under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). MAPPA are a process through which the Police, Probation and Prison Services work together with other agencies to assess and manage the risks posed by individuals convicted of serious violent, sexual and terrorism offences living in the community to protect the public. Under MAPPA, agencies are expected to work together to ensure information is shared to support risk assessment and risk management and to safeguard victims and communities.

Senior Courts of England and Wales

Found: Oliver Dowden KCB CBE MP 16,876 The Rt Hon.

Found: Oliver Dowden KCB CBE MP 16,876 The Rt Hon.

Found: Oliver Dowden KCB CBE MP 16,876 The Rt Hon.