Philip Davies Portrait

Philip Davies

Conservative - Shipley

6,242 (11.6%) majority - 2019 General Election

First elected: 5th May 2005


Select Committees
Panel of Chairs (since January 2020)
Women and Equalities Committee (since June 2021)
Women and Equalities Committee
9th Jun 2021 - 29th Nov 2022
Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Bill
5th Jan 2022 - 12th Jan 2022
Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) Bill
15th Dec 2021 - 5th Jan 2022
Culture, Media and Sport Committee
2nd Mar 2020 - 9th Nov 2020
Culture, Media and Sport Sub-committee on Online Harms and Disinformation
10th Mar 2020 - 9th Nov 2020
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Sub-committee on Online Harms and Disinformation
10th Mar 2020 - 9th Nov 2020
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
2nd Mar 2020 - 9th Nov 2020
DCMS Sub-Committee on Disinformation
15th Jul 2019 - 6th Nov 2019
Culture, Media and Sport Committee
15th Jul 2019 - 6th Nov 2019
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee
15th Jul 2019 - 6th Nov 2019
Panel of Chairs
22nd Jun 2017 - 6th Nov 2019
Women and Equalities Committee
11th Sep 2017 - 6th Nov 2019
Digital, Culture, Media and Sport
15th Jul 2019 - 6th Nov 2019
Panel of Chairs
28th Jun 2010 - 3rd May 2017
Justice Committee
6th Jul 2015 - 3rd May 2017
Women and Equalities Committee
19th Dec 2016 - 3rd May 2017
Culture, Media and Sport Committee
27th Feb 2006 - 30th Mar 2015
Backbench Business Committee
29th Jun 2010 - 1st May 2012
Privacy and Injunctions (Joint Committee)
14th Jul 2011 - 12th Mar 2012
Modernisation of the House of Commons
12th Mar 2007 - 6th May 2010


Division Voting information

During the current Parliament, Philip Davies has voted in 585 divisions, and 39 times against the majority of their Party.

25 Mar 2021 - Coronavirus - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 35 Conservative No votes vs 305 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 484 Noes - 76
22 Mar 2021 - Fire Safety Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 33 Conservative No votes vs 320 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 322 Noes - 253
10 Feb 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Conservative No votes vs 327 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 526 Noes - 24
6 Jan 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Conservative No votes vs 322 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 524 Noes - 16
1 Dec 2020 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 53 Conservative No votes vs 290 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 291 Noes - 78
4 Nov 2020 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 33 Conservative No votes vs 308 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 516 Noes - 38
13 Oct 2020 - Public Health: Coronavirus Regulations - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 42 Conservative No votes vs 298 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 299 Noes - 82
6 Oct 2020 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Conservative No votes vs 285 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 287 Noes - 17
30 Sep 2020 - Coronavirus Act 2020 (Review of Temporary Provisions) - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 7 Conservative No votes vs 330 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 330 Noes - 24
8 Jun 2020 - Divorce, Dissolution and Separation Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Conservative No votes vs 207 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 231 Noes - 16
27 Apr 2021 - Fire Safety Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 31 Conservative No votes vs 320 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 320 Noes - 256
27 Apr 2021 - Delegated Legislation - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 77 Conservative No votes vs 222 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 431 Noes - 89
28 Apr 2021 - Fire Safety Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 32 Conservative No votes vs 321 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 322 Noes - 256
20 Oct 2021 - Environment Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 22 Conservative No votes vs 265 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 268 Noes - 204
8 Nov 2021 - Environment Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Conservative No votes vs 278 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 283 Noes - 163
22 Nov 2021 - Health and Care Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 19 Conservative No votes vs 269 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 272 Noes - 246
23 Nov 2021 - Health and Care Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 18 Conservative Aye votes vs 276 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 219 Noes - 280
23 Nov 2021 - Health and Care Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Conservative No votes vs 290 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 294 Noes - 244
30 Nov 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 19 Conservative No votes vs 268 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 434 Noes - 23
30 Nov 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 32 Conservative No votes vs 259 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 431 Noes - 36
1 Dec 2021 - Finance (No. 2) Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Conservative Aye votes vs 296 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 215 Noes - 299
14 Dec 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 38 Conservative No votes vs 271 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 441 Noes - 41
14 Dec 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 97 Conservative No votes vs 224 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 369 Noes - 126
14 Dec 2021 - Public Health - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 60 Conservative No votes vs 258 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 385 Noes - 100
25 Apr 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Conservative No votes vs 297 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 220
25 Apr 2022 - Health and Care Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 11 Conservative No votes vs 276 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 278 Noes - 182
25 Apr 2022 - Health and Care Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 11 Conservative No votes vs 280 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 282 Noes - 183
22 Jun 2022 - Health and Personal Social Services - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 61 Conservative No votes vs 106 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 215 Noes - 70
18 Oct 2022 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 103 Conservative No votes vs 113 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 297 Noes - 110
5 Dec 2022 - Online Safety Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 308 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 242 Noes - 308
7 Dec 2022 - Financial Services and Markets Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 269 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 206 Noes - 271
7 Mar 2023 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 107 Conservative Aye votes vs 109 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 116 Noes - 299
28 Jun 2023 - Education - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 20 Conservative No votes vs 237 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 373 Noes - 28
5 Sep 2023 - Energy Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Conservative No votes vs 275 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 280 Noes - 19
4 Dec 2023 - Business without Debate - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 26 Conservative No votes vs 217 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 381 Noes - 37
16 Jan 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 57 Conservative Aye votes vs 262 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 58 Noes - 525
16 Jan 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 58 Conservative Aye votes vs 262 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 68 Noes - 529
17 Jan 2024 - Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 59 Conservative Aye votes vs 266 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 65 Noes - 536
21 May 2024 - High Speed Rail (Crewe - Manchester) Bill (Instruction) (No. 3) - View Vote Context
Philip Davies voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Conservative No votes vs 222 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 323 Noes - 7
View All Philip Davies Division Votes

Debates during the 2019 Parliament

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Christopher Chope (Conservative)
(21 debate interactions)
Rishi Sunak (Conservative)
Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury, Minister for the Civil Service, and Minister for the Union
(19 debate interactions)
Robbie Moore (Conservative)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
(12 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
Department for Business and Trade
(52 debate contributions)
Home Office
(35 debate contributions)
Department for Transport
(20 debate contributions)
Department of Health and Social Care
(19 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
View all Philip Davies's debates

Shipley Petitions

e-Petitions are administered by Parliament and allow members of the public to express support for a particular issue.

If an e-petition reaches 10,000 signatures the Government will issue a written response.

If an e-petition reaches 100,000 signatures the petition becomes eligible for a Parliamentary debate (usually Monday 4.30pm in Westminster Hall).

Petition Debates Contributed

We want the Government to abandon the planned implementation of affordability checks for some people who want to place a bet. We believe such checks – which could include assessing whether people are ‘at risk of harm' based on their postcode or job title – are inappropriate and discriminatory.

We are concerned that Parliament has not discussed and will not have a say on the 307 proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations, AND the amendments to 5 Articles of the IHR that were ADOPTED by the 75th World Health Assembly on 27 May 2022.


Latest EDMs signed by Philip Davies

27th November 2023
Philip Davies signed this EDM as a sponsor on Wednesday 29th November 2023

Dogs

Tabled by: Christopher Chope (Conservative - Christchurch)
That an humble Address be presented to His Majesty, praying that the Dangerous Dogs (Designated Types) (England and Wales) Order 2023 (S.I., 2023, No. 1164), dated 31 October 2023, a copy of which was laid before this House on 31 October 2023, be annulled.
13 signatures
(Most recent: 8 Jan 2024)
Signatures by party:
Conservative: 8
Labour: 4
Liberal Democrat: 1
13th May 2019
Philip Davies signed this EDM on Monday 17th June 2019

IR35 OFF-PAYROLL TAX EXTENSION TO PRIVATE SECTOR

Tabled by: Ged Killen (Labour (Co-op) - Rutherglen and Hamilton West)
That this House notes with concern HM Treasury’s plans to extend the off-payroll (IR35) changes to the private sector; believes that this could damage the UK’s flexible workforce, reducing avenues for work and harm the economy; further notes that the extension could force thousands of contractors into false-employment, potentially costing …
38 signatures
(Most recent: 7 Oct 2019)
Signatures by party:
Labour: 19
Conservative: 6
Liberal Democrat: 5
Scottish National Party: 4
Independent: 1
Democratic Unionist Party: 1
Plaid Cymru: 1
Non-affiliated: 1
View All Philip Davies's signed Early Day Motions

Commons initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Philip Davies, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.

MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.


Philip Davies has not been granted any Urgent Questions

Philip Davies has not been granted any Adjournment Debates

3 Bills introduced by Philip Davies


A Bill to make provision for a district-wide referendum in City of Bradford Metropolitan District Council area on the continued inclusion of the areas covered by the Shipley and Keighley parliamentary constituencies in that district; and for connected purposes.

Commons - 40%

Last Event - 2nd Reading
Friday 6th May 2022

A Bill to prohibit the use of affirmative and positive action in recruitment and appointment processes; to repeal the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002; and for connected purposes.

Commons - 40%

Last Event - 2nd Reading: House Of Commons
Friday 21st October 2011

The Bill failed to complete its passage through Parliament before the end of the session. This means the Bill will make no further progress. A Bill to make provision for the succession of female heirs to hereditary titles; and for connected purposes.

Commons - 20%

Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Commons
Tuesday 5th March 2019
(Read Debate)

44 Bills co-sponsored by Philip Davies

Road Traffic and Street Works Bill 2023-24
Sponsor - Kit Malthouse (Con)

Local Authority Boundaries Bill 2022-23
Sponsor - Robbie Moore (Con)

Employee Share Ownership (Reform) Bill 2022-23
Sponsor - George Howarth (Lab)

Non-Disclosure Agreements (No. 2) Bill 2021-22
Sponsor - Maria Miller (Con)

Whistleblowing Bill 2021-22
Sponsor - Mary Robinson (Con)

Voter Registration Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Public Sector Exit Payments (Limitation) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Mobile Homes Act 1983 (Amendment) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Freedom of Speech (Universities) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - David Davis (Con)

Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) (No.2) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Pauline Latham (Con)

Bat Habitats Regulation Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Green Belt Protection Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Electronic Cigarettes (Regulation) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Local Authorities (Borrowing and Investment) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Caravan Sites Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Assaults on Retail Workers (Offences) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Alex Norris (LAB)

June Bank Holiday (Creation) Bill 2019-21
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Reservoirs (Flood Risk) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Holly Lynch (Lab)

Unauthorised Encampments Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Toby Perkins (Lab)

Parental Rights (Rapists) and Family Courts Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Louise Haigh (Lab)

Marriage and Civil Partnership (Minimum Age) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Pauline Latham (Con)

Drone (Regulation) (No. 2) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Hospital (Parking Charges and Business Rates) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Voter Registration (No. 2) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Coastal Path (Definition) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Child Cruelty (Sentences) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Tom Tugendhat (Con)

Health and Social Care (National Data Guardian) Act 2018
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Value Added Tax Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Prisons (Interference with Wireless Telegraphy) Act 2018
Sponsor - Maria Caulfield (Con)

Affordable Home Ownership Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Principal Local Authorities (Grounds for Abolition) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Public Sector Exit Payments (Limitation) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Local Audit (Public Access to Documents) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Border Control Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Voter Registration Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Business of the House Commission Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

June Bank Holiday (Creation) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Peter Bone (Ind)

Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018
Sponsor - Chris Bryant (Lab)

BBC Licence Fee (Civil Penalty) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Judicial Appointments and Retirements (Age Limits) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Benefits and Public Services (Restriction) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

International Development Assistance (Definition) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Local Authorities (Removal of Council Tax Restrictions) Bill 2017-19
Sponsor - Christopher Chope (Con)

Crime (Assaults on Emergency Services Staff) Bill 2016-17
Sponsor - Holly Lynch (Lab)


Latest 50 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
6 Other Department Questions
14th Oct 2022
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, what guidance is provided to Select Committees seeking legal advice.

All Select Committees have access to internal legal advice from the Office of Speaker’s Counsel. In the event that external advice is sought, the Office of Speaker’s Counsel will be consulted before external lawyers are appointed.

Only certain committees have power to appoint legal advisers, but Committees may appoint legally qualified persons as Specialist Advisers.

13th Oct 2022
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, if he will make an estimate of the cost to House of Commons authorities of the (a) internal and (b) external legal advice and (c) legal support provided to the Committee of Privileges on the inquiry into the Rt hon Member for Uxbridge and South Ruislip; what the estimated budget for the inquiry is, and what role the Commission plays in establishing the budget for legal advice for Committee inquiries.

Internal legal advice is provided by salaried members of the Office of Speaker’s Counsel. No additional resources have been required in order to support this inquiry, which has been covered by the ordinary costs of running that Office.

External legal advice has been provided to the Committee by Sir Ernest Ryder KC, at the request of the Committee. The total cost of this advice to date has been £17,850.

Committee inquiries do not have allocated budgets.

The Commission has no involvement in establishing the budget for advice for individual Committee inquiries. Standing Order No. 148A gives the Committee of Privileges power to appoint legal advisers.

13th Oct 2022
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, how much from the public purse has been paid by the House of Commons to Sir Ernest Ryder KC in each of the last 24 months.

The amounts paid will lag the amounts due. The payments due to Sir Ernest Ryder KC for work in each of the following months are as follows:

In respect of the Committee on Standards

December 2021 £1050

January 2022 £4550

February 2022 £6300

March 2022 £700

In respect of the Committee of Privileges

June 2022 £1750

July 2022 £7000

August 2022 £3850

September 2022 £5250

13th Oct 2022
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, with reference to the Second Report of the Privileges Committee 2022-23, HC 632, Appendix (Correspondence with Mr Speaker), if he will make an estimate of the cost to House of Commons authorities of (a) internal and (b) external legal advice relating to the Recall of MPs Act 2015 in the last 12 months.

Internal legal advice is provided by the Office of Speaker’s Counsel, staffed by salaried members of the House service, and has been provided as part of their ordinary work. No additional resources have been required in order to advise the House on the Recall of MPs Act 2015. The cost of external legal advice on that Act in the past 12 months has been £2,700 plus VAT.

13th Oct 2022
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the House of Commons Commission, with reference to the Register of Interests of the hon. Member for Rhondda made in August 2022 relating to Category 2(b) legal support in connection with the Committee of Privileges and the Recall of MPs Act 2015, and with reference to the Second Report of the Privileges Committee 2022-23, HC 632, Appendix (Correspondence with Mr Speaker), if he will place in the Library a copy of all correspondence from that hon. Member to Mr Speaker relating to these matters, including the pro bono legal advice provided by Blackstone Chambers and Bindmans LLP.

The hon. Member for Rhondda sent a letter to Mr Speaker enclosing a copy of a legal Opinion on 19 July 2022. There was no other correspondence concerning this matter. The letter and Opinion will not be placed in the Library in order to protect the confidentiality of Members’ correspondence with the Speaker.

25th Feb 2022
To ask the Attorney General, if she will take steps to ensure that her Department and its agencies remove all internal covid-19 related policies, restrictions and mask mandates.

Throughout the pandemic, all Civil Service employers including the Attorney General’s Office (AGO), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Serious Fraud Office (SFO), Government Legal Department (GLD) and Her Majesties Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) have followed government guidance in setting out their internal COVID-19 related policies. This includes complying with the Working Safely during Coronavirus (COVID-19): Guidance which sets out the key actions organisations should take to protect employees and customers in order to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spreading in workplaces, along with carrying out health and safety risk assessments that include the ongoing risk from COVID-19.

The Government’s recent Living with COVID-19 document, sets out how and when the remaining restrictions will be lifted in England. Government guidance was subsequently amended, including the Working Safely guidance. Which alongside risk assessments, sets out further actions organisations can take to protect employees and customers in the workplace, such as ensuring adequate ventilation, frequent cleaning and asking people with COVID-19 to stay home. The guidance advises that people continue to wear face coverings in crowded and enclosed settings where they come into contact with people they do not normally meet, when rates of transmission are high. Employers will continue to align their policies accordingly. Should individuals wish to wear masks as a matter of personal choice this should be respected.

In respect to the SFO estate, The Canadian High Commission (CHC), in their capacity as landlord, have requested SFO employees, contractors and visitors continue to wear face coverings in the common areas of 2 – 4 Cockspur Street. This includes the lobby, lifts, stairs, toilets, and reception.

Alex Chalk
Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice
22nd Jul 2021
To ask the Attorney General, what his current policy is on the wearing of face coverings in his (a) Department, (b) departmental agencies and (c) related bodies during the covid-19 outbreak.

Throughout the pandemic, the Civil Service, including the Attorney General’s Office (AGO), Government Legal Department (GLD), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI), have followed, and continue to follow, the latest government guidance in relation to managing the risk of COVID-19 in the workplace, including any variations between the four nations of the UK.

In England, the BEIS ‘Working Safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)’ guidance provides sensible precautions employers can take to manage risk and support their staff. The guidance is available via this link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-covid-19/offices-factories-and-labs#offices-7-2.

Whilst it is for individual employers to determine which mitigations are appropriate to adopt as they review their workplace risk assessments in light of the updated guidance. Face coverings, which are no longer required by law, are one possible mitigation employers could adopt if the situation / context warranted it.

HMCTS requires all court users to continue to wear face coverings in court buildings. The CPS’s advice to staff, which has been agreed with trade unions is that, unless exempt, all court users are required to wear a face covering in all public areas of court and tribunal buildings.

The AGO, GLD, CPS, SFO and HMCPSI fully support individuals who choose to wear a face covering in the workplace.

Lucy Frazer
Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
22nd Jul 2020
To ask the Attorney General, how many prosecutions for assaulting an emergency worker have related to assaults against (a) police officers, (b) NHS staff, (c) prison officers, (d) firefighters and (e) other emergency workers since the offence was introduced.

The Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 is legislation that amended section39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to provide offences relating to common assault or battery committed against an emergency worker while carrying out their duties.

The CPS maintains records of the number of offences in which a CPS prosecution commenced, including offences of assaulting an emergency worker. The data provided in the table detailed below shows the total number of offences in which a prosecution by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) commenced at magistrates’ courts under the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 since it came into force on the 13th November 2018. However the CPS does not hold any central record of the details of complainants’ occupations.

2018/19 (Nov 18 - Mar 19)

2019/20

Total offences: Criminal Justice Act 1988 and section 1 of the Assaults on Emergency Workers (Offences) Act 2018 {39}

4,395

23,492

It should be noted that the figures relate to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It may be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence. No data are held on the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not maintain a central record of the number of defendants charged with, or prosecuted for these offences. This information could only be obtained by examining CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.

22nd Jul 2020
To ask the Attorney General, what estimate she has made of the proportion of assaults on shop workers that were prosecuted in each of the last three years.

The CPS does not maintain a central record of complainants’ occupations, nor of the specific circumstances under which a person has been charged with an offence. This information could only be obtained by an examination of CPS case files, which would incur disproportionate cost.

1st Jun 2020
To ask the Attorney General, with reference to paragraph 2.4.137 in the report entitled The Independent Review of the Metropolitan Police Service's handling of non-recent sexual offence investigations alleged against persons of public prominence, published on 4 October 2019, what assessment the CPS has made of the potential merits of seeking the prosecution of the two individuals referred to as potential witnesses A and B for perverting the course of justice and wasting police time.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes criminal cases that have been investigated by the police and other investigative organisations in England and Wales. If a crime is reported it is for the police to decide whether to investigate.

The CPS has not been asked to consider any charges against witness A or B, nor have they provided any early investigative advice to the police. It is a matter for the police as to whether they pursue an investigation in to witness A and witness B.

Once a case is referred to the CPS, any decision to prosecute is made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and must meet the evidential and public interest tests.

12th May 2020
To ask the Attorney General, how many people have been prosecuted for (a) perverting the course of justice and (b) wasting police time in relation to false allegations of domestic abuse in the last 12 months.

The Crown Prosecution Service does not maintain a central record of prosecutions against domestic abuse complainants for perverting the course of justice and/or wasting police time. Obtaining this information would therefore require a manual review of individual case files which would incur a disproportionate cost.

The Crown Prosecution Service takes cases of domestic abuse extremely seriously and is determined to bring perpetrators to justice and ensure victims are protected from repeated offending. The Crown Prosecution Service has specific guidance for prosecutors on how to approach cases where a complaint alleging a false allegation is made. When reaching a prosecution decision Crown Prosecutors apply the two stage test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. There must be sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and it must be in the public interest for a prosecution to be brought.

21st Feb 2020
To ask the Attorney General, if she will extend the current 28 day limit for appealing a sentence under the unduly lenient sentence scheme; and if he will make a statement.

A referral to the Court of Appeal for consideration of a sentence as unduly lenient must be made within 28 days of the date of the sentence as set out in Schedule 3, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The 28 day statutory time limit is absolute; the statute provides no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out of time.

There are no plans to extend the 28 day deadline. The current deadline provides an appropriate balance between the rights of victims and offenders, ensuring that offenders are not left uncertain of whether their sentence may be extended for a long period of time, whilst allowing victims sufficient time to request a review of the sentence under the scheme.

21st Feb 2020
To ask the Attorney General, how many of the cases referred to her Department under the unduly lenient sentence scheme were received on the 28th day after sentence outside office hours; and what proportion of those cases were (a) accepted and (b) refused in each of the last five years for which information is available.

2015 – of the 14 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2016 – of the 28 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2017 - of the 27 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2018 - of the 31 sentences that were received out of time 2 were received on the 28th day and too late for them to be actioned.

2019 - of the 43 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

Whilst referrals for sentences are received and actioned on the 28th day, those are cases that are received early enough on the day to be actioned. An unduly lenient sentence case can only be taken forward if either myself or the Attorney General has approved action (on the basis of a complete prosecution file and proper legal advice) and an application has been filed with the Court of Appeal before the expiry of the statutory 28 day deadline. None of the above cases were accepted as being within time by my office as they were received too late to be actioned and consequently they were all marked as out of time.

A referral to the Court of Appeal for consideration of a sentence as unduly lenient must be made within 28 days of the date of the sentence as set out in Schedule 3, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The 28 day statutory time limit is absolute; the statute provides no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out of time.

21st Feb 2020
To ask the Attorney General, how many of the cases referred to her Department under the unduly lenient sentence scheme were received before the 28th day after sentence time period had elapsed but outside office hours and where his office did not re-open until after that 28 day deadline had passed; and what proportion of those cases were (a) accepted and (b) refused in each of the last five years for which information is available.

2015 – of the 14 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2016 – of the 28 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2017 - of the 27 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

2018 - of the 31 sentences that were received out of time 2 were received on the 28th day and too late for them to be actioned.

2019 - of the 43 sentences that were received out of time only 1 was received on the 28th day and too late for it to be actioned.

Whilst referrals for sentences are received and actioned on the 28th day, those are cases that are received early enough on the day to be actioned. An unduly lenient sentence case can only be taken forward if either myself or the Attorney General has approved action (on the basis of a complete prosecution file and proper legal advice) and an application has been filed with the Court of Appeal before the expiry of the statutory 28 day deadline. None of the above cases were accepted as being within time by my office as they were received too late to be actioned and consequently they were all marked as out of time.

A referral to the Court of Appeal for consideration of a sentence as unduly lenient must be made within 28 days of the date of the sentence as set out in Schedule 3, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The 28 day statutory time limit is absolute; the statute provides no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out of time.

11th Feb 2020
To ask the Attorney General, whether there is a legislative basis for the 28-day limit on appealing an unduly lenient sentence meaning something other than 28 days.

A referral to the Court of Appeal for consideration of a sentence as unduly lenient must be made within 28 days of the date of the sentence as set out in Schedule 3, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The 28 day statutory time limit is absolute; the statute provides no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out of time.

An unduly lenient sentence case can only be taken forward if either myself or the Attorney General has approved action (on the basis of a complete prosecution file and proper legal advice) and an application has been filed with the Court of Appeal before the expiry of the statutory 28 day deadline. Tracey Hanson emailed the Attorney General’s office, requesting a review of a potentially unduly lenient sentence. The email was received by my office at 8.41pm on the 28th day and therefore was received after the close of court business. By the time my office received the email it was impossible to act on it and it was too late to file a referral with The Court of Appeal.

11th Feb 2020
To ask the Attorney General, what the basis was for his authority to refuse the application of Tracey Hanson in relation to a potentially unduly lenient sentence; and if he will make a statement.

A referral to the Court of Appeal for consideration of a sentence as unduly lenient must be made within 28 days of the date of the sentence as set out in Schedule 3, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The 28 day statutory time limit is absolute; the statute provides no power to extend the time limit or to apply for leave to refer out of time.

An unduly lenient sentence case can only be taken forward if either myself or the Attorney General has approved action (on the basis of a complete prosecution file and proper legal advice) and an application has been filed with the Court of Appeal before the expiry of the statutory 28 day deadline. Tracey Hanson emailed the Attorney General’s office, requesting a review of a potentially unduly lenient sentence. The email was received by my office at 8.41pm on the 28th day and therefore was received after the close of court business. By the time my office received the email it was impossible to act on it and it was too late to file a referral with The Court of Appeal.

15th Jan 2020
To ask the Attorney General, if he will extend the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme to include additional offences.

The Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme is an important avenue for victims, family members and the public to ensure justice is delivered in the most serious cases.

This is why the Government has extended the scheme to cover further child sexual abuse offences, as well as some domestic abuse offences, including controlling and coercive behavior.

The remit of the scheme remains under constant review. We work closely with stakeholders to ensure it appropriately reflects the needs of victims, family members and the public.

12th Apr 2024
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of trends in the level of (a) GDP growth and (b) the value of exports in each year since 1 February 2021.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

A response to the Hon gentleman’s Parliamentary Question of 12/04/2024 is attached.

John Glen
Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
28th Nov 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of trends in the level of domestic abuse within (a) gay and (b) lesbian couple relationships in each of the last 5 years.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority.

A response to the Hon. Member's Parliamentary Question of 28 November is attached.

11th Nov 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the civil service headcount for their Department was on (a) 15 November 2022 and (b) 1 February 2020.

In October 2022 (latest workforce figures) the number of staff employed in my Department was 9464. In February 2020 the number of staff employed in my Department was 7960.

Most of the increase here (84%) is the result of the transfer of staff and functions into the Cabinet Office from other Government Departments under machinery of government changes.

As part of this Government’s commitment to transparency, my Department publishes workforce statistics each month. Information about staffing levels since June 2016 are available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/payroll-costs-and-non-consolidated-pay-data

9th Nov 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many employees in his Department work on matters related to covid-19.

There are 27 full time employees in one business unit currently working on the Government’s response to the Covid-19 Inquiry. There are no other business units in the Cabinet Office that are dedicated to COVID-19. Roles are not recorded at an individual level.

14th Jun 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the compliance rates of trade union facility time data reporting in terms of the (a) projected and (b) actual number of returns in 2019-20.

The Government is committed to ensuring that facility time usage within the public sector remains accountable and represents value for money to the taxpayer.

With the exception of the education sector, compliance rates for all other sectors, using the Government’s reporting portal, for the 2020/21 reporting year exceeded 60% of expected returns. This was an overall improvement compared to the 2019/20 reporting year where both education and the NHS sectors were below a 60% compliance rate.

The Government is taking action this year to ensure that overall compliance rates continue to rise. Greater transparency will enhance accountability over the spending of taxpayers’ money and practices within the public sector.

The full sector breakdown for the compliance rates over the last two years is below:

Sector

Compliance

2019/20

2020/21

Civil Service

100%

100%

Education

18%

18%

Local Authority

69%

64%

NHS

46%

66%

Police

69%

77%

Network Rail is not currently in scope for the relevant facility time reporting regulations; we are open to representations on this matter.

14th Jun 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the compliance rates of trade union facility time data reporting in terms of the (a) projected and (b) actual number of returns in 2020-21.

The Government is committed to ensuring that facility time usage within the public sector remains accountable and represents value for money to the taxpayer.

With the exception of the education sector, compliance rates for all other sectors, using the Government’s reporting portal, for the 2020/21 reporting year exceeded 60% of expected returns. This was an overall improvement compared to the 2019/20 reporting year where both education and the NHS sectors were below a 60% compliance rate.

The Government is taking action this year to ensure that overall compliance rates continue to rise. Greater transparency will enhance accountability over the spending of taxpayers’ money and practices within the public sector.

The full sector breakdown for the compliance rates over the last two years is below:

Sector

Compliance

2019/20

2020/21

Civil Service

100%

100%

Education

18%

18%

Local Authority

69%

64%

NHS

46%

66%

Police

69%

77%

Network Rail is not currently in scope for the relevant facility time reporting regulations; we are open to representations on this matter.

28th Mar 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will detail the losses and special payments valued at under £300,000 for his departmental group as defined by section A4.10.7 in HM Treasury's Managing Public Money for (a) 2018-19, (b) 2019-20 and (c) 2020-21.

Cabinet Office records losses and special payments in line with managing public money and are included in the department’s losses & special payments register. The total number and amounts are summarised in the Cabinet Office’s Annual Accounts.

All losses and special payments for the years 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 valued at under £300,000 are set out in the attached document.

25th Feb 2022
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will take steps to ensure that his Department and its agencies remove all internal covid-19 related policies, restrictions and mask mandates.

Throughout the pandemic, all Civil Service employers have followed government guidance in setting out their internal COVID-19 related policies. This includes complying with the Working Safely during Coronavirus (COVID-19): Guidance which sets out the key actions organisations should take to protect employees and customers in order to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spreading in workplaces, along with carrying out health and safety risk assessments that include the ongoing risk from COVID-19.

On 21 February 2022, the Government published their COVID-19 Response: Living with COVID-19. This document sets out how and when the remaining restrictions will be lifted in England. Government guidance was subsequently amended, including the Working Safely guidance.

The Government’s Working Safely guidance continues to require organisations to carry out a risk assessment which includes the risk from COVID-19. It also sets out additional actions organisations can take to protect employees and customers in the workplace, such as ensuring adequate ventilation, frequent cleaning, asking people to wash their hands frequently and asking people with COVID-19 to stay away. The guidance advises that people continue to wear face coverings in crowded and enclosed settings where they come into contact with people they do not normally meet, when rates of transmission are high. Civil Service employers will continue to follow this guidance and align their policies accordingly.

18th Aug 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many and what proportion of victims of violent crimes were (a) female aged 18 and over, (b) men aged 18 and over, (c) female under 18 and (d) male under 18 for the latest year for which figures are available.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

22nd Jul 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will publish the (a) age, (b) underlying medical conditions and (c) actual cause of death of each person recorded as having died in the last 14 days with or from covid-19.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

22nd Jul 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, what his current policy is on the wearing of face coverings in his (a) Department, (b) departmental agencies and (c) related bodies during the covid-19 outbreak.

Throughout the pandemic, the Cabinet Office has followed, and continues to follow, the latest government guidance in relation to managing the risk of COVID-19 in the workplace, including any variations between the four nations of the UK.

In England, the BEIS ‘Working Safely during coronavirus (COVID-19)’ guidance provides sensible precautions employers can take to manage risk and support their staff. The guidance is available via this link: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/working-safely-during-covid-19/offices-factories-and-labs#offices-7-2.

It is for individual employers to determine which mitigations are appropriate to adopt as they review their workplace risk assessments in light of the updated guidance.

Cabinet Office fully supports individuals who choose to wear a face covering in the workplace and asks staff to comply with any additional Health and Safety procedures in buildings they enter in the course of their work.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
21st Jun 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Written Statement of 15 December 2020, HCWS652, on Unconscious bias training, what progress has been made on ensuring that (a) local government, (b) the police, (c) the NHS and (d) other parts of the public sector review their approaches to staff training as a result of the evidence and developments in the Civil Service.

Unconscious bias training courses were removed from the Civil Service cross-Civil Service curriculum in January 2021. The Cabinet Office also took action to remove unconscious bias training from any relevant learning and related materials. The Written Ministerial Statement on this was communicated to all departments.

The Civil Service is committed to maintaining a strong focus on diversity and inclusion. A review of existing learning is being conducted to ensure new learning utilises evidence-based interventions. The government expects other parts of the public sector to review their approaches in light of the evidence and developments in the Civil Service.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
21st Jun 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Written Statement of 15 December 2020, HCWS652, on Unconscious bias training, what steps he has taken to ensure the phasing out of unconscious bias training for civil servants in Government departments.

Unconscious bias training courses were removed from the Civil Service cross-Civil Service curriculum in January 2021. The Cabinet Office also took action to remove unconscious bias training from any relevant learning and related materials. The Written Ministerial Statement on this was communicated to all departments.

The Civil Service is committed to maintaining a strong focus on diversity and inclusion. A review of existing learning is being conducted to ensure new learning utilises evidence-based interventions. The government expects other parts of the public sector to review their approaches in light of the evidence and developments in the Civil Service.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
21st Jun 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Written Statement of 15 December 2020, HCWS652, on Unconscious bias training, what steps he has taken to phase out unconscious bias training in his Department.

Unconscious bias training courses were removed from the Civil Service cross-Civil Service curriculum in January 2021. The Cabinet Office also took action to remove unconscious bias training from any relevant learning and related materials. The Written Ministerial Statement on this was communicated to all departments.

The Civil Service is committed to maintaining a strong focus on diversity and inclusion. A review of existing learning is being conducted to ensure new learning utilises evidence-based interventions. The government expects other parts of the public sector to review their approaches in light of the evidence and developments in the Civil Service.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
21st Jun 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Written Statement of 15 December 2020, HCWS652, what steps he has taken to phase out unconscious bias training in his Department.

Unconscious bias training courses were removed from the Civil Service cross-Civil Service curriculum in January 2021. The Cabinet Office also took action to remove unconscious bias training from any relevant learning and related materials. The Written Ministerial Statement on this was communicated to all departments.

The Civil Service is committed to maintaining a strong focus on diversity and inclusion. A review of existing learning is being conducted to ensure new learning utilises evidence-based interventions. The government expects other parts of the public sector to review their approaches in light of the evidence and developments in the Civil Service.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
10th Jun 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many and what proportion of people have died within 28 days of receiving a covid-19 vaccination.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
13th Apr 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many and what proportion of people have died within 28 days of receiving a covid-19 vaccination; and whether those people will all be considered to have died as a result of that vaccination.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

22nd Jan 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will relocate some civil services jobs to Bradford district.

I refer the Hon. Member to the answer given to PQ.133645.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
22nd Jan 2021
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, what representations he has received from Bradford Council on the merits of relocating civil service jobs to Bradford district.

I refer the Hon. Member to the answer given to PQ.133645.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
24th Nov 2020
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps his Department took to mark International Men's Day on 19 November 2020.

The Cabinet Office promoted a number of virtual events to mark International Men’s Day on 19 November 2020, this included an event regarding Men & Mental Health.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
7th Oct 2020
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the biggest pay rise given to someone in his Department was in (a) percentage and (b) cash terms in the last 12 months.

The data requested could have the potential to identify an individual's personal information, and therefore would not normally be disclosed.

Information on senior salaries are already published in our annual reports. Information on salaries and roles for staff is published as Organogram of Staff Roles & Salaries on Gov.UK.

Salaries of individual civil servants may change because of promotions, re-ranking with a pay band, changes to Civil Service grade, or a change of role.

For 2020, pay awards were paid in accordance with appropriate central pay guidance which differ depending on grade and profession.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
25th Sep 2020
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will publish the cost-benefit analysis the Government has undertaken to inform its response to the covid-19 outbreak.

Government undertakes a wide range of analysis to support decision making and publishes information to keep Parliament and the wider public updated which is available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-covid-19-statistics-and-analysis#social-impacts.

There is no single cost-benefit analysis.

Penny Mordaunt
Lord President of the Council and Leader of the House of Commons
11th Sep 2020
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the (a) value was of contracts issued, (b) which foreign governments were involved and (c) other communication services were provided by Government Communication Service International to foreign governments in the last 12 months.

Further to the information published in the Cabinet Office Annual Accounts for 2019-20, the total value of communications contracts issued by the Cabinet Office was £981,403 supporting UK security and trade objectives in Nigeria, Tunisia, Montenegro, Philippines and India. Government Communication Service International shares communication expertise and knowledge based on UK Government best practice in security, economy, health and education communications.

Julia Lopez
Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
8th Sep 2020
To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many people have died from (a) influenza, (b) pneumonia and (c) a combination of influenza and pneumonia in each of the last 12 months, by (i) region and (ii) constituency.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.

25th Jun 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many people by ethnic group died from (a) flu and (b) pneumonia in each of the last five years.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.

11th Jun 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the mortality rates were for each ethnic group in each of the last five years.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.

26th Feb 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many (a) Union Jack, (b) St George, (c) Scottish Saltire and (d) Flag of Wales flags his Department owns.

10 Downing Street is an integral part of the Cabinet Office and is included in this answer.

Cabinet Office and 10 Downing Street owns 29 Union Flags (including internal ceremonial flags), 3 St George’s, 4 Scottish Saltires and 2 Flags of Wales.

The information on how many times each flag has been flown is not held centrally.

26th Feb 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many times the (a) Union Jack, (b) St George's flag, (c) Scottish Saltire and (d) the flag of Wales has been flown from the Cabinet Office in each year since 2015.

10 Downing Street is an integral part of the Cabinet Office and is included in this answer.

Cabinet Office and 10 Downing Street owns 29 Union Flags (including internal ceremonial flags), 3 St George’s, 4 Scottish Saltires and 2 Flags of Wales.

The information on how many times each flag has been flown is not held centrally.

11th Feb 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many (a) men and (b) women were killed by their (i) male and (ii) female current or ex-partner in the latest year for which information is available.

The information requested falls under the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.

11th Feb 2020
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many (a) men and (b) women were victims of homicide in the latest year for which information is available.

The information requested falls under the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.