Shabana Mahmood

The Government is investing over £400 million to support access to remote education and online social care services, including securing 1.3 million laptops and tablets for disadvantaged children and young people.

This includes over 750,000 laptops and tablets that were delivered to schools, trusts and local authorities by the end of last week.

Laptops and tablets are owned by schools, trusts or local authorities who can lend these to children and young people who need them most during the current COVID-19 restrictions.

Some pupils who have difficulty engaging in remote education may be considered to be vulnerable children and therefore eligible to attend school. It is up to the child’s school or local authority to make this decision. The decision would be based on the needs of the child and their family, and a range of other factors, as set out in our published guidance.

The Department understands that schools may face staffing pressures that can create challenges in trying to deliver both high quality on site and remote education, especially where pupil attendance on site remains high due to high numbers of key worker and vulnerable children. Leaders in schools and colleges should ensure the balance of on site and remote teaching is manageable for staff and reflect this in the offer posted on their school or college website.

For schools that do not already have a full remote education curriculum or resources in place, or where they may face staffing pressures, the Department strongly recommends that they consider using Oak National Academy or other high quality resource providers.

9,294 laptops have been delivered directly to Birmingham local authority this academic year. Further devices have also been delivered to academy trusts that include schools located in Birmingham local authority which are not included in this figure.

The Government is investing over £400 million to support access to remote education and online social care services, including securing 1.3 million laptops and tablets for disadvantaged children and young people.

This includes over 750,000 laptops and tablets that were delivered to schools, trusts and local authorities by the end of last week.

Laptops and tablets are owned by schools, trusts or local authorities who can lend these to children and young people who need them most during the current COVID-19 restrictions.

Some pupils who have difficulty engaging in remote education may be considered to be vulnerable children and therefore eligible to attend school. It is up to the child’s school or local authority to make this decision. The decision would be based on the needs of the child and their family, and a range of other factors, as set out in our published guidance.

The Department understands that schools may face staffing pressures that can create challenges in trying to deliver both high quality on site and remote education, especially where pupil attendance on site remains high due to high numbers of key worker and vulnerable children. Leaders in schools and colleges should ensure the balance of on site and remote teaching is manageable for staff and reflect this in the offer posted on their school or college website.

For schools that do not already have a full remote education curriculum or resources in place, or where they may face staffing pressures, the Department strongly recommends that they consider using Oak National Academy or other high quality resource providers.

9,294 laptops have been delivered directly to Birmingham local authority this academic year. Further devices have also been delivered to academy trusts that include schools located in Birmingham local authority which are not included in this figure.

During the national lockdown, schools should only allow vulnerable children and young people and the children of critical workers to attend. Guidance for this is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-maintaining-educational-provision/guidance-for-schools-colleges-and-local-authorities-on-maintaining-educational-provision. The definition of vulnerable children has been in place since March, has been consistent throughout our response to the COVID-19 outbreak, and includes those children who may be vulnerable for a reason at local discretion. Several examples of the sorts of factors that may contribute to vulnerability are included, but it is not an exhaustive or definitive list.

On 8 January 2021, the Department published updated guidance on remote education, available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/950510/School_national_restrictions_guidance.pdf. In this guidance, we refer to the definition of vulnerable children, which notes that some children who have difficulty engaging in remote education may be considered vulnerable and, therefore, eligible to attend provision. It is up to the child’s education provider or local authority to make this decision. The decision would be based on the needs of the child and their family, and a range of other factors, as set out in the following guidance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-maintaining-educational-provision/guidance-for-schools-colleges-and-local-authorities-on-maintaining-educational-provision#vulnerable-children-and-young-people.

The updated remote education guidance also sets outs that where pupils continue to experience barriers to digital remote education, the Department expect schools to work to overcome these barriers. This could include distributing school-owned laptops or supplementing digital provision with different forms of remote education, such as printed resources or textbooks. This should be supplemented with other forms of communication to keep pupils and students on track, or answer questions about work.

The Department has also published a good practice guide, which provides advice to teachers and school leaders to support effective delivery of the curriculum remotely. This is available here https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/remote-education-good-practice/remote-education-good-practice. This is part of our broader package of support for schools, accessible via the following ‘Get Help with Remote Education’ page: https://get-help-with-remote-education.education.gov.uk/good-teaching-practice.html.

The Department for Education is working closely with the Department for Transport and High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd to encourage more learners to take up opportunities to gain key skills needed across the transport and infrastructure sectors. As a National College, it is expected that students will not just be located in the local constituency but will have a different travel to learn pattern given their specialist national higher level skills offer.

The Department for Education is working closely with the Department for Transport and High Speed 2 (HS2) Ltd to encourage more learners to take up opportunities to gain key skills needed across the transport and infrastructure sectors. As a National College, it is expected that students will not just be located in the local constituency but will have a different travel to learn pattern given their specialist national higher level skills offer.

The department has accepted the Further Education Commissioner (FEC) recommendation that a Structure and Prospects Appraisal (SPA) was the most appropriate way forward to safeguard the strategically important provision and ensure its financial sustainability. The conclusion of the SPA is expected in late summer, when a proposal and the cost of maintaining the provision will be considered. In the interim, the department is supporting the corporation in its efforts to improve the outcomes for learners. Our other employer-led further education colleges, in the form of Institutes of Technology, have recently become operational and are currently financially sustainable.

Institutes of Technology (IoTs) are employer-led further education institutions focussing on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) skills. IoTs are a different model to National Colleges as they are a collaboration bringing together existing further education providers with higher education institutions and employers, to lead delivery of higher-level technical STEM skills to drive future economic growth operating across England at a sub-regional scale.

Eight IoTs are already operational with a further 4 approved: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/institutes-of-technology--2. A second competition for additional IoTs is to be launched later this year. Details can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/institutes-of-technology-wave-2-competition-prospectus.

The department has accepted the Further Education Commissioner (FEC) recommendation that a Structure and Prospects Appraisal (SPA) was the most appropriate way forward to safeguard the strategically important provision and ensure its financial sustainability. The conclusion of the SPA is expected in late summer, when a proposal and the cost of maintaining the provision will be considered. In the interim, the department is supporting the corporation in its efforts to improve the outcomes for learners. Our other employer-led further education colleges, in the form of Institutes of Technology, have recently become operational and are currently financially sustainable.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Waste crime damages the environment and blights communities. The Government is committed to tackling this criminal activity and has significantly bolstered local authority enforcement powers in recent years as a result. Councils now have powers to issue fixed penalty notices for fly-tipping and stronger powers to seize and destroy vehicles involved in waste crime. Waste collection authorities can require the occupier or owner of land to remove any illegally deposited controlled waste or to take steps to eliminate the effects of the waste.

We will go further - including measures in the Environment Bill to combat waste crime through better access to evidence and improved powers of entry. Our new electronic waste tracking measures and our planned reform to waste carriers, brokers and dealers licensing will make it harder than ever for waste criminals to escape responsibility for their actions.

Defra has made no further assessment of the effectiveness of the powers afforded to local authorities in this respect.

Local authorities are responsible for keeping land in their control clear of waste. Crown authorities and others have similar responsibilities while landowners are responsible for the land they own. HM Land Registry publish ownership information on most registered land.

Waste crime damages the environment and blights communities. The Government is committed to tackling this criminal activity and has significantly bolstered local authority enforcement powers in recent years as a result. Councils now have powers to issue fixed penalty notices for fly-tipping and stronger powers to seize and destroy vehicles involved in waste crime. Waste collection authorities can require the occupier or owner of land to remove any illegally deposited controlled waste or to take steps to eliminate the effects of the waste.

We will go further - including measures in the Environment Bill to combat waste crime through better access to evidence and improved powers of entry. Our new electronic waste tracking measures and our planned reform to waste carriers, brokers and dealers licensing will make it harder than ever for waste criminals to escape responsibility for their actions.

Defra has made no further assessment of the effectiveness of the powers afforded to local authorities in this respect.

Local authorities are responsible for keeping land in their control clear of waste. Crown authorities and others have similar responsibilities while landowners are responsible for the land they own. HM Land Registry publish ownership information on most registered land.

The department does not produce estimates of the numbers of rogue operators in the waste collection sector. The Environment Agency recently published a survey of waste crime which provides useful information (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-waste-crime-survey-report-2021-findings-and-analysis)

The objectives of the Midlands Rail Hub are to support economic growth across the region. At this early stage of development, no detailed assessment of the number of jobs created either directly or indirectly by the scheme has been undertaken.

Motorists that are required to pay a Clean Air Zone charge must pay the charge no later than one week from the day of travel. Clean Air Zone charges collected by local authorities are available within 7 days of payment.

Invoicing terms are subject to agreements between local authorities and the department but local authorities will be required to pay to use the CAZ Central Service no more frequently than every quarter. Invoices will cover use of the CAZ central services in the previous quarter and will be required to be paid approximately two months after end of the same quarter.

Motorists that are required to pay a Clean Air Zone charge must pay the charge no later than one week from the day of travel. Clean Air Zone charges collected by local authorities are available within 7 days of payment.

Invoicing terms are subject to agreements between local authorities and the department but local authorities will be required to pay to use the CAZ Central Service no more frequently than every quarter. Invoices will cover use of the CAZ central services in the previous quarter and will be required to be paid approximately two months after end of the same quarter.

Motorists that are required to pay a Clean Air Zone charge must pay the charge no later than one week from the day of travel. Clean Air Zone charges collected by local authorities are available within 7 days of payment.

Invoicing terms are subject to agreements between local authorities and the department but local authorities will be required to pay to use the CAZ Central Service no more frequently than every quarter. Invoices will cover use of the CAZ central services in the previous quarter and will be required to be paid approximately two months after end of the same quarter.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

There will be no impact on local authority budgets. All implementation and operational costs are either covered by central Government funding or from revenues raised from the charges that local authorities collect from customers that pay to drive in the clean air zone.

(a) Officials within DfT are working closely with their opposite numbers in DfE regarding NCATI. DfT are active members of the Steering Group overseeing the Structure and Prospects Appraisal (SPA) being led by DfE’s Further Education Commissioner to ensure its future model is sustainable and delivers on DfT Policy objectives.

(b) HS2 Ltd and its supply chain continue to work with Further Education Colleges on a number of employer and college-led initiatives and programmes. The table below summarises the main activities:

The additional £510m announced on 13^th December 2021 is new funding that will enable us to drive down the level of fraud in Universal Credit and recover more debt.

It will support several different methods of fraud detection and prevention, including a targeted review of Universal Credit claims, the development of a new Debt Enforcement Function and further recruitment into the Counter Fraud and Compliance and Debt directorate, so that we can continue to respond quickly and effectively to threats.

This recruitment, which includes funding for around 2,000 trained specialists, will help tackle fraud across a range of benefits, including any Housing Benefit related fraud.

At Spending Review 2021, the Department also secured an additional £103m for fraud and error activity. This funding is enabling DWP to continue key fraud and error detection and prevention work, and secured the completion of our current transformation programme, thus enhancing our ability to prevent and detect fraud and error.

The information requested is not available.

Supported Housing provides a vital service to some of the most vulnerable people in society and the care, support or supervision they are provided with helps them to live as independently as possible in the community.

Local authorities are responsible for the oversight of supported housing in their respective areas. The Government does not oversee the delivery of support services or individual engagement with those services.

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

An Impact Assessment had not been prepared for the Universal Credit (Exceptions to the Requirement not to be receiving Education) (Amendment) Regulations 2021 because they restore the original policy intent of Universal Credit.

No such assessments have been made of poverty levels or household incomes in Birmingham Ladywood, Birmingham City region or the West Midlands.

It is not possible to produce a robust estimate of the impact of removing the £20 uplift on poverty or related issues. This is due to the uncertainty around the speed and distribution of the economic recovery.

The latest poverty figures (2019/20) demonstrate that absolute poverty rates (both before and after housing costs) have fallen since 2009/10. In 2019/20, 14% of people were in absolute poverty (before housing costs), compared to 16% in 2009/10. This government believe that work is the best way out of poverty, and the latest statistics (2019/20) show that children in workless households are around 5 times more likely to be in absolute poverty, before housing costs, than those where all adults work.

There have been significant positive developments in the public health situation since the uplift was first introduced. With the success of the vaccine rollout and record job vacancies, it is right that our focus is on helping people back into work. This approach is based on clear evidence about the importance of employment, particularly where it is full-time, in substantially reducing the risks of poverty.

Through our Plan for Jobs, we are targeting tailored support schemes of people of all ages to help them prepare for, get into and progress in work. These include: Kickstart, delivering tens of thousands of six-month work placements for Universal Credit claimants aged 16-24 at risk of unemployment; we have also recruited an additional 13,500 work coaches to provide more intensive support to find a job; and introduced Restart which provides 12 months’ intensive employment support to Universal Credit claimants who are unemployed for a year. Our Plan for Jobs interventions will support more than two million people.

We recognise that some people continue to require extra support, which is why we have introduced a £421 million Household Support Fund to help vulnerable people in England with essential household costs over the winter as the economy recovers. The Barnett Formula will apply in the usual way, with the devolved administrations receiving almost £80 million (£41m for the Scottish Government, £25m for the Welsh Government and £14m for the NI Executive), for a total of £500 million.

No such assessments have been made of poverty levels or household incomes in Birmingham Ladywood, Birmingham City region or the West Midlands.

It is not possible to produce a robust estimate of the impact of removing the £20 uplift on poverty or related issues. This is due to the uncertainty around the speed and distribution of the economic recovery.

The latest poverty figures (2019/20) demonstrate that absolute poverty rates (both before and after housing costs) have fallen since 2009/10. In 2019/20, 14% of people were in absolute poverty (before housing costs), compared to 16% in 2009/10. This government believe that work is the best way out of poverty, and the latest statistics (2019/20) show that children in workless households are around 5 times more likely to be in absolute poverty, before housing costs, than those where all adults work.

There have been significant positive developments in the public health situation since the uplift was first introduced. With the success of the vaccine rollout and record job vacancies, it is right that our focus is on helping people back into work. This approach is based on clear evidence about the importance of employment, particularly where it is full-time, in substantially reducing the risks of poverty.

Through our Plan for Jobs, we are targeting tailored support schemes of people of all ages to help them prepare for, get into and progress in work. These include: Kickstart, delivering tens of thousands of six-month work placements for Universal Credit claimants aged 16-24 at risk of unemployment; we have also recruited an additional 13,500 work coaches to provide more intensive support to find a job; and introduced Restart which provides 12 months’ intensive employment support to Universal Credit claimants who are unemployed for a year. Our Plan for Jobs interventions will support more than two million people.

We recognise that some people continue to require extra support, which is why we have introduced a £421 million Household Support Fund to help vulnerable people in England with essential household costs over the winter as the economy recovers. The Barnett Formula will apply in the usual way, with the devolved administrations receiving almost £80 million (£41m for the Scottish Government, £25m for the Welsh Government and £14m for the NI Executive), for a total of £500 million.

The number of Local Authority referrals received by DWP in each of the last three financial years is as follows:

As a result of those referrals, the following number of cases were accepted by DWP:

The difference between the two data sets represents the number of referrals that were not progressed. This could be because the referral contained insufficient information or duplicated an existing communication.

The Department’s recording system does not hold information on benefit fraud referrals made specifically in relation to tenants living in Supported Accommodation Units. It is also unable to provide figures that reflect individual Local Authorities. The figures provided therefore represent total numbers for all Local Authorities in England, Scotland and Wales.

There have been over 180,000 jobs approved by the Department of Work and Pensions’ Kickstart scheme nationally. We are not able to break this information down geographically.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing Kickstart applications, referrals and starts, the data collected might be subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system which has been developed quickly. The management information presented here has not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics, but is provided in the interests of transparency.

As of the 12^th March 2021, there have been over 900 unique gateway applications approved and over 1,200 unique employer bids accepted on the Kickstart Scheme with many more employers included under the gateway applications.

We are currently unable to publish the number of rejected applications. We are also unable to publish information broken down below regional level.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing Kickstart applications, referrals and starts, the data collected might be subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system which has been developed quickly. The management information presented here has not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics, but is provided in the interests of transparency.

As of the 12^th March 2021, there have been over 900 unique gateway applications approved and over 1,200 unique employer bids accepted on the Kickstart Scheme with many more employers included under the gateway applications.

We are currently unable to publish the number of rejected applications. We are also unable to publish information broken down below regional level.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing Kickstart applications, referrals and starts, the data collected might be subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system which has been developed quickly. The management information presented here has not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics, but is provided in the interests of transparency.

A breakdown of exact decision times is currently unavailable. I refer the honourable member to the answer given for PQ 167866.

A breakdown of exact decision times is currently unavailable. I refer the honourable member to the answer given for PQ 167866.

The expected estimated cost of the Kickstart scheme will be approximately £2 billion, this includes administration costs and grant payments.

As of the 18^th March, the average number of jobs per application to the Department of Work and Pensions’ Kickstart Scheme was around 50 jobs.

This figure is based on the total number of applications received and their associated total number of jobs, an employer or Gateway can make multiple applications. From 3rd February 2021, we removed the 30 vacancy threshold for a direct application to Kickstart, allowing employers to make smaller applications which will affect this average.

Although care is taken when processing and analysing Kickstart applications, referrals and starts, the data collected might be subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale recording system which has been developed quickly. The management information presented here has not been subjected to the usual standard of quality assurance associated with official statistics, but is provided in the interests of transparency.

The decrease to the maximum deductions limit relates to a reduction in the overall normal maximum rate of deductions from Universal Credit (UC) from 40% to 30% of the claimant’s standard allowance from October 2019. The normal maximum rate of deductions will reduce to 25% of the claimant’s standard allowance in October this year.

Magistrate Courts impose Fines and Compensation orders on offenders, and can instruct the DWP to make a deduction from UC. The rate we can recover court fines is set out in the regulations at a minimum rate of 5% of a claimant’s standard allowance and up to a maximum rate of £108.35 per assessment period, as long as there is sufficient UC in payment. Similarly, the maximum deduction for court fines will not exceed 30% of the claimant’s standard allowance (25% from October.

This information is not held. The Department does not take applications to reduce court fine deductions but signposts the claimant to Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service. Magistrate Courts impose Fines and Compensation orders on offenders, and can instruct DWP to make a deduction from Universal Credit. The deduction rate is set out in regulations at a minimum rate of 5% of the standard allowance and up to a maximum rate of £108.35 per assessment period, as long as there is sufficient UC in payment. The maximum deduction will not exceed 30% of the claimant’s standard allowance.

Work Coaches can refer claimants to more specialist support for personal budgeting, money guidance and debt advice if required, including through the Money and Pensions Service (MaPS).

The information is provided in the table below

Notes

1.Claim figures rounded to the nearest 1,000, payments to the nearest £100,000.

2. Total value of Universal Credit claims reflects the amount of money paid to claimants and their landlords as part of their award, including the amount which they would have been entitled to had it not been deducted/sanctioned. It does not include other payments such as advances and hardship payments.

3.Figures are subject to retrospective change as later data becomes available.

4.Claim numbers may not match official statistics caseloads due to small methodological differences.

5.The increase in the proportion of claims with deductions for fines is due to an improved manual process phased in between February and the end of March 2019 for courts to send through their court fines deductions.

6.The decrease in number of claims with deductions for court fines, and total deducted from October 2019 is because the maximum deductions limit was reduced from 40% of the standard allowance to 30% of the standard allowance.

7.Figures for April and May 2020 are affected by the temporary suspension of third party deductions due to Covid-19.

8.During June 2020, third party deductions were reinstated but other deductions (for benefit overpayments etc.) were still suspended. This led to an increase in the total deducted for court fines, as a result of their place in the deductions priority order. From July 2020, other deductions began to be reinstated, following a phased approach.

There are no plans to review the four categories of specified accommodation at a national or local level. However, we are reviewing the guidance for specified accommodation claims to improve consistency in decision-making.

The specified accommodation definition was introduced into Housing Benefit in 2014 to extend the protections for exempt accommodation to other categories of supported housing that, although not materially different, were subject to welfare reforms. As a result, housing support for people living in specified accommodation is paid through Housing Benefit rather than Universal Credit and this support is exempt from the Benefit Cap.

The specified accommodation definition applies to all of Housing Benefit across Great Britain

From October, we will reduce the Universal Credit standard deductions cap to 25% of a claimant’s Universal Credit standard allowance from 30%.

Court fine deductions fall within the cap which means, from October, the maximum deduction will be the lower of £108.35, set out in legislation, or 25% of a claimant’s standard allowance. The maximum deduction applies only where a claimant’s individual circumstances allow the maximum deduction within the standard deductions cap.

Deductions for court fines are only made from Universal Credit if a Court requests DWP to do so. The Court only makes such a request if it decides that a deduction from benefit is the most appropriate method of payment. It has always been the case that individuals can ask the Court to consider a private payment arrangement - both before a deduction from benefits is requested and at any time thereafter. Officials from DWP and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service have regular discussions about these arrangements.

We are unable to provide figures for court fine deductions for all of the last three years as improvements to third party data reporting commenced in November 2018. Information which is available can be found in the table below.

Notes:

From October, we will reduce the Universal Credit standard deductions cap to 25% of a claimant’s Universal Credit standard allowance from 30%.

Court fine deductions fall within the cap which means, from October, the maximum deduction will be the lower of £108.35, set out in legislation, or 25% of a claimant’s standard allowance. The maximum deduction applies only where a claimant’s individual circumstances allow the maximum deduction within the standard deductions cap.

Deductions for court fines are only made from Universal Credit if a Court requests DWP to do so. The Court only makes such a request if it decides that a deduction from benefit is the most appropriate method of payment. It has always been the case that individuals can ask the Court to consider a private payment arrangement - both before a deduction from benefits is requested and at any time thereafter. Officials from DWP and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service have regular discussions about these arrangements.

Information showing expenditure on Housing Benefit for each of the last three years are published here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/benefit-expenditure-tables

We have been unable to source information showing Housing Benefit expenditure for exempt accommodation claims in each of the last three years due to the disproportionate cost to the Department of doing so.

To source this information would be at a disproportionate cost to the Department. However, we can clarify that, wherever a claimant’s accommodation meets the definition of exempt accommodation, their housing costs support is paid through Housing Benefit, not Universal Credit.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has completed 1485 investigations into fatal accidents in workplaces since 1 January 2010.

The average time taken in days to complete those investigations is given in the table 1.

Table 1

* Primacy is when the lead for investigating the incident passes to HSE from the police.

Notes

The average completion time analysis is based on the difference in days between the incident/primacy date and the date that the investigation case was closed on its operational database rather than the date the investigation was concluded which is not recorded. The administrative practice of closing investigation cases has changed over the past 10 years and has not always been as soon as possible after the completion of the investigation. This explains the difference in the reduction in the time taken to complete an investigation as highlighted in Table 1 in addition to the operational improvements that have been made to reduce the time taken.

The figures were extracted from HSE’s live operational database and provide the picture on the date of extraction i.e. 8 October 2020.

My sympathy goes out to the families, friends and those closely affected by the deaths of the five workers and also to the survivor of the incident, who was seriously injured.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is an independent regulator it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the specifics of an ongoing investigation. I am assured by HSE that the investigation is progressing and following due legal process.

This information is not available in the format requested.

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) does not record this information as proof of culpability/liability is not a component of the relevant statutory provisions for which HSE is the enforcing authority.

The number of fatal workplace accidents per year which subsequently resulted in the prosecution of an employer are shown in the following table:

(a) Commencing 1^st January

(b) Defined by Government Office Region

(c) Figures include the West Midlands

Notes

The table shows fatalities reported under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) 2013 and previous legislation and the analysis is based on the incident date and where the subsequent prosecution action has been completed.

There can be significant delays between a reportable incident and a prosecution concluding due to a number of reasons including: delays in primacy for the investigation passing to HSE from the police, delays arising from the need for an inquest etc. Consequently, there have no fatalities in 2019 or 2020 which have yet resulted in a concluded prosecution.

Prosecutions taken arising from a fatal investigation should not imply that the employer was liable for the death but only that we had sufficient evidence of a breach of law and that it was in the public interest to prosecute.

The figures were extracted from HSE’s live operational database and provide the picture on the date of extraction – 8 October 2020 - this is not a static picture as there are ongoing investigations for a number of the incidents, especially those which occurred in recent years.

The Secretary of State has had a number of discussions with the Chancellor about the Government’s response to the Covid-19 outbreak. The Secretary of State is committed to supporting people of all ages through this difficult period, just as she is committed to ensuring opportunities are available to people across all regions of the UK to ensure we level up our economy as we respond to the pandemic.

There is no statutory limit on the length of a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation. HSE has a number of processes in place to expedite investigations including:

• an investigation procedure which includes time periods for the completion of regular reviews of an investigation. Such reviews take into account issues such as timeliness and resources;

• senior management oversight of investigations to monitor progress against key performance indicators; and

• the Work-Related Deaths Protocol which aims to improve co-operation between interested parties including HSE and the police during the investigation of a work-related fatality, thereby improving efficiency.

HSE focuses on investigating the most serious of incidents, particularly those that result in fatalities or major injuries and these can be very complex to investigate. HSE understands that timeliness is important and has strengthened procedures. Since 2013/14 there has been an improvement in the percentage of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy for the investigation passing to HSE from the police, as shown in the table below:

The percentage of non-fatal investigations completed within 12 months is shown in the table below:

(p) – Provisional and based on live operational information and is therefore subject to change.

HSE’s key performance indicators framework includes indicators on the timeliness of completing investigations, in particular 80% of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy and to complete 90% of non-fatal investigations within 12 months. Performance is regularly reviewed by the HSE Board who are appointed by the Secretary of State and figures are published annually in their Annual Report and Accounts.

There is no statutory limit on the length of a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation. HSE has a number of processes in place to expedite investigations including:

• an investigation procedure which includes time periods for the completion of regular reviews of an investigation. Such reviews take into account issues such as timeliness and resources;

• senior management oversight of investigations to monitor progress against key performance indicators; and

• the Work-Related Deaths Protocol which aims to improve co-operation between interested parties including HSE and the police during the investigation of a work-related fatality, thereby improving efficiency.

HSE focuses on investigating the most serious of incidents, particularly those that result in fatalities or major injuries and these can be very complex to investigate. HSE understands that timeliness is important and has strengthened procedures. Since 2013/14 there has been an improvement in the percentage of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy for the investigation passing to HSE from the police, as shown in the table below:

The percentage of non-fatal investigations completed within 12 months is shown in the table below:

(p) – Provisional and based on live operational information and is therefore subject to change.

HSE’s key performance indicators framework includes indicators on the timeliness of completing investigations, in particular 80% of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy and to complete 90% of non-fatal investigations within 12 months. Performance is regularly reviewed by the HSE Board who are appointed by the Secretary of State and figures are published annually in their Annual Report and Accounts.

There is no statutory limit on the length of a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation. HSE has a number of processes in place to expedite investigations including:

• an investigation procedure which includes time periods for the completion of regular reviews of an investigation. Such reviews take into account issues such as timeliness and resources;

• senior management oversight of investigations to monitor progress against key performance indicators; and

• the Work-Related Deaths Protocol which aims to improve co-operation between interested parties including HSE and the police during the investigation of a work-related fatality, thereby improving efficiency.

HSE focuses on investigating the most serious of incidents, particularly those that result in fatalities or major injuries and these can be very complex to investigate. HSE understands that timeliness is important and has strengthened procedures. Since 2013/14 there has been an improvement in the percentage of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy for the investigation passing to HSE from the police, as shown in the table below:

The percentage of non-fatal investigations completed within 12 months is shown in the table below:

(p) – Provisional and based on live operational information and is therefore subject to change.

HSE’s key performance indicators framework includes indicators on the timeliness of completing investigations, in particular 80% of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy and to complete 90% of non-fatal investigations within 12 months. Performance is regularly reviewed by the HSE Board who are appointed by the Secretary of State and figures are published annually in their Annual Report and Accounts.

There is no statutory limit on the length of a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) investigation. HSE has a number of processes in place to expedite investigations including:

• an investigation procedure which includes time periods for the completion of regular reviews of an investigation. Such reviews take into account issues such as timeliness and resources;

• senior management oversight of investigations to monitor progress against key performance indicators; and

• the Work-Related Deaths Protocol which aims to improve co-operation between interested parties including HSE and the police during the investigation of a work-related fatality, thereby improving efficiency.

HSE focuses on investigating the most serious of incidents, particularly those that result in fatalities or major injuries and these can be very complex to investigate. HSE understands that timeliness is important and has strengthened procedures. Since 2013/14 there has been an improvement in the percentage of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy for the investigation passing to HSE from the police, as shown in the table below:

The percentage of non-fatal investigations completed within 12 months is shown in the table below:

(p) – Provisional and based on live operational information and is therefore subject to change.

HSE’s key performance indicators framework includes indicators on the timeliness of completing investigations, in particular 80% of fatal investigations completed within 12 months of primacy and to complete 90% of non-fatal investigations within 12 months. Performance is regularly reviewed by the HSE Board who are appointed by the Secretary of State and figures are published annually in their Annual Report and Accounts.

HSE’s Key Performance Indicators for fatal and non-fatal investigations completed are published in its Annual Report as a percentage. In 2019/20, the target for fatal investigations is the completion of 80% within 12 months of HSE assuming primacy and for non-fatal investigations the target is 90% within 12 months.

For work related deaths, the police initially take the lead for the investigation and primacy is passed to HSE when they decide not to press charges under their legislation. The percentage of those fatal and non-fatal investigations which exceeded 12 months in duration in the last 3 years are:

The above figures are taken from data published in HSE’s Annual Report and Accounts 2018/19.

(p) – Provisional and based on live operational information and is therefore subject to change.

1.6 Million people are already claiming some £5.4 billion in pension Credit. The Government wants to make sure that all pensioners eligible can claim the Pension Credit to which they are rightly entitled. That is why from the 10 February we are launching a nationwide campaign to raise awareness of Pension Credit and encourage those over State Pension age to check whether they’re eligible. The campaign, which will run for 12 weeks, includes a short, animated video that will be shown in GP waiting rooms and in Post Offices. It will also be shown to Facebook users over State Pension Age and be supported by messaging on social media.

We regularly work with our stakeholders to help spread the key messages from the campaign because we know that often the best ways to reach eligible pensioners is through trusted stakeholders working in the community. The Pension Credit toolkit is being updated with the campaign materials to supplement the resources it already contains for those working with pensioners, such as guides to Pension Credit and guidance designed to help older people understand how they could get Pension Credit. The toolkit is designed to help organisations support someone applying for Pension Credit as well as provide ideas for encouraging take-up. It can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pension-credit-toolkit

The Department for Work and Pensions continues to use a wide range of channels including information on www.gov.uk, in leaflets and by telephone to communicate information about benefits including Pension Credit to potential claimants. We target activity on engaging with people who may be eligible to benefits at pivotal stages, such as when they claim State Pension or Attendance Allowance or report a change in their circumstances which may mean that they could be eligible for Pension Credit. In addition, the Pension Credit calculator https://www.gov.uk/pension-credit-calculator enables potential claimants to check if they are likely to be eligible and get an estimate of what they may receive.

The Department for Work and Pensions publishes an annual report detailing latest available statistics regarding the estimated take-up of Pension Credit and other income-related benefits.

The latest version can be found here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-related-benefits-estimates-of-take-up-financial-year-2016-to-2017

The next report containing 2017/18 data is currently due to be published at the end of February 2020.

Pension Credit is intended to provide long term support for people who have permanently retired from the labour market on grounds of age.

The Government does not believe it is right that different labour market conditions should apply to people below State Pension age based on the age of their partner. The younger partner in a mixed age couple should have the same incentives to work and save for their own retirement as other people of the same age. Unlike Pension Credit, which in most cases allows couples to retain only £10 a week of earned income, Universal Credit provides clear incentives for people to find and progress in work. The younger partner in a mixed age couple claiming Universal Credit will get the personalised support provided by Work Coaches to help them find and progress in work where appropriate. If the younger partner is unable to work because of disability or caring requirements, additional amounts may be payable and conditionality requirements adjusted.

No work-related requirements will be applied to the older partner and there is no effect on entitlement to, or ability to receive, a State Pension.

This change does not apply to couples already claiming Pension Credit and/or Housing Benefit for pensioners on 14 May 2019 for as long as they remain entitled to either benefit.

In means-tested benefits, couples in a household are treated and assessed as a single unit rather than on an individual basis. The rate for a couple is lower than the rates would be for two single people to take account of lower aggregate living expenses for a couple. There is no evidence from elsewhere in the tax-benefit system that this leads to couples separating. In developing the policy, it was judged that the strategic objective of maintaining contact with the labour market and incentives to save for retirement outweighed the risk of genuine separation, given this lack of evidence.

Pension Credit is intended to provide long term support for people who have permanently retired from the labour market on grounds of age.

The Government does not believe it is right that different labour market conditions should apply to people below State Pension age based on the age of their partner. The younger partner in a mixed age couple should have the same incentives to work and save for their own retirement as other people of the same age. Unlike Pension Credit, which in most cases allows couples to retain only £10 a week of earned income, Universal Credit provides clear incentives for people to find and progress in work. The younger partner in a mixed age couple claiming Universal Credit will get the personalised support provided by Work Coaches to help them find and progress in work where appropriate. If the younger partner is unable to work because of disability or caring requirements, additional amounts may be payable and conditionality requirements adjusted.

No work-related requirements will be applied to the older partner and there is no effect on entitlement to, or ability to receive, a State Pension.

This change does not apply to couples already claiming Pension Credit and/or Housing Benefit for pensioners on 14 May 2019 for as long as they remain entitled to either benefit.

In means-tested benefits, couples in a household are treated and assessed as a single unit rather than on an individual basis. The rate for a couple is lower than the rates would be for two single people to take account of lower aggregate living expenses for a couple. There is no evidence from elsewhere in the tax-benefit system that this leads to couples separating. In developing the policy, it was judged that the strategic objective of maintaining contact with the labour market and incentives to save for retirement outweighed the risk of genuine separation, given this lack of evidence.

Pension Credit is intended to provide long term support for people who have permanently retired from the labour market on grounds of age.

The Government does not believe it is right that different labour market conditions should apply to people below State Pension age based on the age of their partner. The younger partner in a mixed age couple should have the same incentives to work and save for their own retirement as other people of the same age. Unlike Pension Credit, which in most cases allows couples to retain only £10 a week of earned income, Universal Credit provides clear incentives for people to find and progress in work. The younger partner in a mixed age couple claiming Universal Credit will get the personalised support provided by Work Coaches to help them find and progress in work where appropriate. If the younger partner is unable to work because of disability or caring requirements, additional amounts may be payable and conditionality requirements adjusted.

No work-related requirements will be applied to the older partner and there is no effect on entitlement to, or ability to receive, a State Pension.

This change does not apply to couples already claiming Pension Credit and/or Housing Benefit for pensioners on 14 May 2019 for as long as they remain entitled to either benefit.

In means-tested benefits, couples in a household are treated and assessed as a single unit rather than on an individual basis. The rate for a couple is lower than the rates would be for two single people to take account of lower aggregate living expenses for a couple. There is no evidence from elsewhere in the tax-benefit system that this leads to couples separating. In developing the policy, it was judged that the strategic objective of maintaining contact with the labour market and incentives to save for retirement outweighed the risk of genuine separation, given this lack of evidence.

NHS England provides a weekly breakdown of first and second COVID-19 vaccinations in people who are from black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds, which is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-vaccinations/

We do not hold data on vaccinations administered by vaccination type and we do not collect information on those who refuse the vaccine.

Research into the long-term health symptoms and impacts of COVID-19 and the number of people likely to be experiencing them is ongoing. The National Institute for Health Research and UK Research and Innovation have invested £8.4 million in the Post-HOSPitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID), led by Christopher Brightling.

PHOSP-COVID aims to determine the short to long-term chronic health (and health economic) consequences of COVID-19 infection in survivors following hospitalisation, including those from black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds. The consortium includes experts that have worked extensively with optimising inclusion and recruitment of under-represented populations, such as the BAME community, and will ensure the population recruited to the study is representative of those hospitalised with COVID-19.

The Government has implemented specific measures, guided by medical and scientific expertise, to reduce the spread of the virus in all communities. For example, Public Health England has been working with the Government Equalities Office in order to help departments take a consistent approach to risk mitigation and guidance, including for black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) communities where relevant, and support engagement with sector representatives on key issues that arise during the pandemic.

We are concerned that COVID-19 has had a disproportionate effect on people from BAME backgrounds, which is why the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Equalities (Kemi Badenoch MP) has been tasked to lead the Government's work tackling this issue. With the support of the Race Disparity Unit, the Minister is also reviewing the effectiveness and impact of current actions being undertaken by relevant Government departments and their agencies to directly lessen disparities in infection and death rates of COVID-19.

There are no specifically targeted mental health programmes for residents of other buildings fitted with flammable cladding. If residents of buildings fitted with flammable cladding need mental health support, we would urge them to make contact with their general practitioner to discuss these issues so they may be referred to mental health services as appropriate.

Mental health is one of the Government’s top priorities and we are working across Government to ensure that all people, regardless of their residential situation, get the help and support they need.

All upper tier local authorities have access to record level (including sex, age, occupation and postcode) test and case data.

We also publish public dashboards at a national, regional and local authority level and the Middle Layer Super Output Area (MSOA) map, which allows individuals to type in a postcode to find their MSOA and see how many cases there are in small areas of around 7,000 people

Data on the 7 day average for the number of people with COVID-19 identified through an NHS lab (Pillar 1) or from commercial swab testing (Pillar 2) back to March 2020 is available as part of the NHS Digital Progression Dashboard to upper tier local authority level and is available at the following link:

https://digital.nhs.uk/dashboards/progression

The United Kingdom’s response to COVID-19 is are underpinned by scientific advice informed by a number of infectious disease models. Each of these is overseen by world-leading academic and public health institutions, who come together in the UK Government’s Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M).

At each review point, impacts on black, Asian and minority ethnic groups have been carefully considered, in line with the Public Sector Equality Duty requirement for public bodies to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between different people when carrying out their activities.

The Government will continue to review the measures, assessing them to ensure that they continue to be necessary and proportionate based on available scientific evidence, which includes up to date data.

Public Health England led a rapid review to better understand how different factors can impact on how people are affected by COVID-19. This includes analysis of ethnicity, deprivation, age, sex (male and female) and obesity, where data was available. The review’s findings have now been published and can be viewed at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-review-of-disparities-in-risks-and-outcomes

The Government Office for Science currently publishes the latest estimate of the United Kingdom-wide range for R on a weekly basis. At the time of writing the current range is estimated to be 0.7-0.9 and is based on latest data available to determine infection and transmission rates. We do not calculate nor compare the R rate in different settings.

Guidance for multigenerational households can be found at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-stay-at-home-guidance/guidance-for-households-with-grandparents-parents-and-children-living-together-where-someone-is-at-increased-risk-or-has-symptoms-of-coronavirus-cov

As of 28 May, the Make Cell identified 502 opportunities from companies with the potential to manufacture safe-to-use personal protective equipment to the technical standards, scale and pace required. Of these, 374 are being fully assessed, 77 have been ‘qualified’ and a further 27 now have an approved technical design following prototype development. To date, the Department has raised 13 purchase orders (POs) with nine different companies – covering gowns, aprons, facemasks, visors, and hand sanitizer. These POs are for nearly half-a-billion items of PPE, 12 million square metres of gown fabric and 105 tonnes of raw materials for facemasks. Companies with raised POs have already started the manufacturing process, with some already delivering to National Health Service frontline services. More new manufacturers of PPE are expected to commit to producing PPE in the coming weeks, with 25 opportunist companies in final commercial discussions.

Public Health England (PHE) has been asked to review the potential that some ethnic minority groups are disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. As part of this review, PHE is matching laboratory records of COVID-19 cases to other health records to draw down accurate data on ethnicity, age, sex and geographical region.

We have asked Public Health England to complete a rapid review to understand how COVID-19 may be having an impact on different ethnic groups. To complement this rapid review, the National Institute for Health Research and UK Research and Innovation issued a joint call on 22 April for research proposals to investigate emerging evidence of an association between ethnicity and COVID-19 incidence and adverse health outcomes.

We are very concerned by the apparent disproportionate number of people from minority ethnic backgrounds who have died, both within the National Health Service and overall. We have asked Public Health England (PHE) to complete a rapid review to understand how COVID-19 may be having an impact on different ethnic groups, and other groups of concern. PHE has begun linking thousands of existing health records for people who have had COVID-19 in order to gather more robust data.

To complement this rapid review by PHE, the National Institute for Health Research and UK Research and Innovation issued a joint call on 22 April for research proposals to investigate emerging evidence of an association between ethnicity and COVID-19 incidence and adverse health outcomes.

We have made no such estimate. There is no central National Health Service collection of information on medicines issued to individual patients in NHS hospitals.

Where a patient is subject to the Mental Health Act 1983 for over three months, they have the right to a Second Opinion Appointed Doctor who will confirm a patient’s capacity to consent to treatment, and review whether continuing medication is necessary.

Patients subject to the Act can also access Independent Mental Health Advocates who provide support to patients to exercise their rights and ensure they can participate in the decisions that are made about their care and treatment.

Patients also have the right to appeal to an independent tribunal, which has the power to discharge patients from their detention under the Act.

For mental health patients not detained under the Mental Health Act, there is no legal right to a second opinion. However, as standard clinical practice National Health Service trusts will have arrangements in place for second opinion requests.

Patients have the right, set out in the NHS Constitution, to make a complaint about any aspect of National Health Service care, treatment or services and to have that complaint properly investigated.

The NHS complaints procedure, including the process for investigating and responding to a complaint, is set out in secondary legislation, primarily the Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009.

Anyone wishing to make a complaint can do so either to the service provider or to the commissioner. If they are not happy with the outcome of their complaint, they have the right to ask the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to investigate.

Care and Treatment Reviews (CTRs), and Care, Education and Treatment Reviews (CETRs) for the under 18s, are undertaken for anyone with learning disabilities, autism or both who may be at risk of admission to, or who is already in, a specialist learning disability or mental health hospital.

The purpose of the CTR, or CETR, is to ensure that an individual’s care and treatment is still meeting their needs and both CTRs and CETRs will assess whether medication is being used appropriately and that steps are being taken to minimise the use of any psychotropic medication. The review team, which is led by the responsible commissioner with support from independent expert advisers who bring additional challenge to the process, will make recommendations to improve the individual’s care with follow-up checks to ensure that this is happening.

Patients have the right, set out in the NHS Constitution, to make a complaint about any aspect of National Health Service care, treatment or services and to have that complaint properly investigated.

The NHS complaints procedure, including the process for investigating and responding to a complaint, is set out in secondary legislation, primarily the Local Authority Social Services and National Health Service Complaints (England) Regulations 2009.

Anyone wishing to make a complaint can do so either to the service provider or to the commissioner. If they are not happy with the outcome of their complaint, they have the right to ask the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman to investigate.

Care and Treatment Reviews (CTRs), and Care, Education and Treatment Reviews (CETRs) for the under 18s, are undertaken for anyone with learning disabilities, autism or both who may be at risk of admission to, or who is already in, a specialist learning disability or mental health hospital.

The purpose of the CTR, or CETR, is to ensure that an individual’s care and treatment is still meeting their needs and both CTRs and CETRs will assess whether medication is being used appropriately and that steps are being taken to minimise the use of any psychotropic medication. The review team, which is led by the responsible commissioner with support from independent expert advisers who bring additional challenge to the process, will make recommendations to improve the individual’s care with follow-up checks to ensure that this is happening.

We have taken note of the motion passed by the Canadian House of Commons relating to Xinjiang, though this has no impact on our security cooperation with Canada. The UK continues to play a leading role in holding China to account for its gross human rights abuses in Xinjiang, working closely with international partners including Canada. It is the long-standing policy of the British Government that any judgment as to whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court, rather than for Governments or non-judicial bodies.

We have taken note of the motion passed by the Canadian House of Commons relating to Xinjiang. The UK continues to play a leading role in holding China to account for its gross human rights abuses in Xinjiang, working closely with international partners including Canada. It is the long-standing policy of the British Government that any judgment as to whether genocide has occurred is a matter for a competent court, rather than for Governments or non-judicial bodies.

Her Majesty's Government diplomatic engagement and Overseas Development Assistance programmes support Turkey's ongoing efforts to assist its migrants and refugees in a way that respects their welfare and human rights. On 13 January, we raised the Turkey-China Treaty of Extradition with the Turkish authorities and received assurances that safeguards were in place for those affected.

We have repeatedly called on countries to respect the obligation of not forcing persons to return to a country where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of fundamental rights violations, and will continue to do so. The UK will continue to take a global leadership role in standing up for the rights of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang.

The UK has taken a leading international role in holding China to account for its human rights violations in Xinjiang, including in respect of credible evidence of forced labour. The UK led the first international joint statements on this issue at the UN, including at the UN Human Rights Council in June. Most recently, on 6 October, alongside Germany, we brought together a total of 39 countries to express grave concern at the situation in Xinjiang in a joint statement at the UN Third Committee. The statement expressed deep concern at the growing number of reports of forced labour in Xinjiang. In addition, at the UN Human Rights Council in September, we raised the issue of forced labour in our national statement which we devoted entirely to China - the first time we had focused on a single country since Salisbury in 2018.

We regularly raise our serious concerns about the extra-judicial detention of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, both directly with the Chinese authorities and at the UN alongside international partners. On 6 October, the UK and 38 other countries joined a statement at the UN Third Committee in New York expressing deep concern at the situation in Xinjiang, including the mass detention of Uyghurs in political re-education camps. This growing coalition reflects UK diplomatic leadership, including the personal involvement of the Foreign Secretary in raising the issue with a wide range of partners. On 28 July, the Foreign Secretary raised human rights violations in Xinjiang with his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister and State Councillor Wang Yi.

The UK is monitoring the Prosecutor's investigations into alleged crimes by the Myanmar military. The UK is clear that the Myanmar military bears responsibility for atrocities against the Rohingya and other minorities. There has been no meaningful accountability for these acts. Accountability is essential to any long-term progress on the crisis.

In respect of the situation in Xinjiang, the UK is focused on building a coalition of likeminded partners and raising concerns at senior levels bilaterally with China to increase pressure on China to change course. Most recently, on 6 October the UK and 38 other countries joined a statement at the UN Third Committee in New York expressing deep concern at the situation in Xinjiang, including the mass detention of Uyghurs in political re-education camps.

As I [Minister Adams] set out during an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on 9 September, we are seriously concerned about the human rights situation in Xinjiang. We regularly raise our serious concerns about the extra-judicial detention of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, both directly with the Chinese authorities and publicly, including at the UN. On 25 September, at the 45th session of the UN Human Rights Council, Lord (Tariq) Ahmad raised serious concerns about the human rights situations in Xinjiang, and called for China to release all those who are arbitrarily detained. On 28 July, the Foreign Secretary raised human rights violations in Xinjiang with his Chinese counterpart, Foreign Minister and State Councillor Wang Yi.

As Minister for Equalities, I will be working with the Race Disparity Unit and the Department for Health and Social Care to carry forward work to identify and fill the gaps in PHE’s review; and work across government to take appropriate steps to mitigate disparities identified. The terms of reference for this work, which include quarterly updates to the Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Health and Social Care on progress, were published on GOV.UK on 4 June.

We regularly raise our concerns about the human rights situation in Xinjiang with the Chinese authorities at senior levels, and most recently our British Ambassador to China raised our concerns with Vice Foreign Minister Qin Gang on 24 December 2019. We also regularly discuss the situation in Xinjiang with likeminded partners including at the UN. We have issued or joined a number of statements registering our concern in recent months: on 29 October 2019 at UN Third Committee, the UK read out a joint statement signed by 22 others drawing attention to the human rights violations and abuses in Xinjiang and called on China to uphold its obligations to respect human rights. On 24 September 2019, during the UN General Assembly the Minister of State for the Commonwealth, UN and South Asia called on China to allow UN observers immediate and unfettered access to the region. On 17 September 2019, at the 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council, the UK again called for UN experts to be granted unfettered access to Xinjiang and raised our concerns on arbitrary detention.

The EWS1 form was introduced by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) to assist in valuation of high-rise residential buildings for mortgage purposes. Government does not support a blanket approach in EWS1 requests for lower risk properties and is encouraging mortgage lenders to accept other equivalent evidence from building owners for valuation purposes.

On 22 June, the Prime Minister announced that the Government will relax the current public health guidance for those identified as Clinically Extremely Vulnerable (CEV) to shield at home. This means from 1 August they will be able to return to work if they are unable to work from home, provided their workplace is COVID-safe.

It is important that this group continue to take careful precautions, and employers should do all they can to enable them to work from home where this is possible, including moving them to another role if required. Where this is not possible, the CEV should be provided with the safest on-site roles that enable them to maintain social distancing from others.

If employers cannot provide a safe working environment, the CEV will continue to have access to an unprecedented package of financial support. This is not limited to the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, but also includes the introduction of the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme, and an increase in the generosity of welfare payments worth a further £8bn.

Current guidance for those who live with the shielded, including those in multi-generational households, is that they do not need to shield themselves but must carefully follow guidance on social distancing.

The Government is in continual dialogue with the insurance sector to understand and influence its response to this situation, and is encouraging insurers to do all they can to support customers experiencing these issues.

We are exploring all options to ensure that leaseholders are able to insure the buildings in which they live until remedial works can be completed.

The Government has announced unprecedented support for business and workers to protect them against the current economic emergency including almost £300 billion of guarantees – equivalent to 15% of UK GDP. Museums, galleries and other entities in the arts and heritage sector, can benefit from a range of support measures including:

· A 12-month business rates holiday for all eligible retail, leisure and hospitality businesses in England

· The retail, hospitality and leisure grant fund (RHLGF)

· Small business grant funding (SBGF) of £10,000 for all business in receipt of small business rate relief or rural rate relief

· The Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme (CJRS)

· The Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS)

· The Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBL) for small and micro enterprises

· VAT deferral for up to 12 months

· The Time To Pay scheme, through which businesses in financial distress, and with outstanding tax liabilities, can receive support with their tax affairs

· Protection for commercial leaseholders against automatic forfeiture for non-payment until June 30, 2020

The Business Support website provides further information about how businesses can access the support that has been made available, who is eligible, when the schemes open and how to apply - https://www.businesssupport.gov.uk/coronavirus-business-support.

Separately, the Arts Council England has made £160 million of emergency funding available, and the National Lottery Heritage Fund £50million, with grants of between £3000 and £50,000 available through the latter.

Insurers make decisions about the terms on which they will offer cover following an assessment of the relevant risks. This is usually informed by the insurer’s claims experience and other industry-wide statistics. The capabilities of insurers to assess risk is a key element on which they compete. This competition is important and should lead to better products and lower prices for consumers.

However, the Government is aware of the concerns of those people in affected buildings. The Government has taken a number of steps that will have an impact on insurers’ risk assessments.

Firstly, the Government announced that it would take steps to reform the building safety system, and will review the progress of removing unsafe ACM cladding from affected buildings. In addition, the Government has implemented measures such as providing £1 billion in 2020-21 to support the remediation of unsafe non-ACM cladding materials on high-rise buildings.

More specifically on insurance, the Government announced that it will commission a review with the insurance industry to consider how Professional Indemnity Insurance can be provided to fire engineers and other construction professionals to ensure they have the confidence to advise on the fire risks associated with ACM cladding.

The £1 billion Building Safety Fund will be open to social sector landlords and private sector building owners who cannot afford to remediate unsafe cladding on buildings over 18 metres. The split of funding will depend on the circumstances of the landlord / building owner who make successful applications to the fund when the bidding process opens later this year.

The Government is in continual dialogue with the insurance sector about its contribution to handling this unprecedented situation. The Government is also working closely with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to ensure that the rules are being upheld during this crisis.

For those businesses which have an appropriate policy that covers government ordered closure and unspecified notifiable diseases, the Government’s social distancing instructions are sufficient to allow businesses to make a claim against their insurance, provided the other terms and conditions in their policy are met.

The FCA’s rules require insurers to handle claims fairly and promptly; provide reasonable guidance to help a policyholder make a claim, and appropriate information on its progress; not reject a claim unreasonably; and settle claims promptly once settlement terms are agreed. In addition, the FCA has said that, in light of COVID-19, insurers must consider very carefully the needs of their customers and show flexibility in their treatment of them.

Furthermore, on 15 April, FCA sent a letter to the insurance industry, setting out the FCA's expectation of firms regarding their handling of business interruption insurance claims, urging insurers to settle claims quickly in cases where there was a clear obligation to pay the claim in full or in part.

In addition, on 1 May, the FCA published a statement setting out their intention to seek legal clarity on the handling of business interruption insurance claims, in order to resolve any doubt for businesses facing uncertainty on their claims. In their statement the FCA also noted that insurers should look at how they can help consumers who are experiencing financial distress as a result of COVID-19.

However, most businesses have not purchased insurance that covers losses from COVID-19. Insurance policies differ significantly, so businesses are encouraged to check the terms and conditions of their specific policy and contact their providers.

The Government recognises that businesses who do not have appropriate insurance cover will require support from elsewhere. As such, businesses should explore the full package of support set out by the Chancellor, which includes measures such as business rates holidays, the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme, and wage support.

The Government is in continual dialogue with the insurance sector about its contribution to handling this unprecedented situation. The Government is also working closely with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to ensure that the rules are being upheld during this crisis.

For those businesses which have an appropriate policy that covers government ordered closure and unspecified notifiable diseases, the Government’s social distancing instructions are sufficient to allow businesses to make a claim against their insurance, provided the other terms and conditions in their policy are met.

The FCA’s rules require insurers to handle claims fairly and promptly; provide reasonable guidance to help a policyholder make a claim, and appropriate information on its progress; not reject a claim unreasonably; and settle claims promptly once settlement terms are agreed. In addition, the FCA has said that, in light of COVID-19, insurers must consider very carefully the needs of their customers and show flexibility in their treatment of them.

Furthermore, on 15 April, FCA sent a letter to the insurance industry, setting out the FCA's expectation of firms regarding their handling of business interruption insurance claims, urging insurers to settle claims quickly in cases where there was a clear obligation to pay the claim in full or in part.

In addition, on 1 May, the FCA published a statement setting out their intention to seek legal clarity on the handling of business interruption insurance claims, in order to resolve any doubt for businesses facing uncertainty on their claims. In their statement the FCA also noted that insurers should look at how they can help consumers who are experiencing financial distress as a result of COVID-19.

However, most businesses have not purchased insurance that covers losses from COVID-19. Insurance policies differ significantly, so businesses are encouraged to check the terms and conditions of their specific policy and contact their providers.

The Government recognises that businesses who do not have appropriate insurance cover will require support from elsewhere. As such, businesses should explore the full package of support set out by the Chancellor, which includes measures such as business rates holidays, the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme, and wage support.

The Government is in continual dialogue with the insurance sector about its contribution to handling this unprecedented situation. The Government is also working closely with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to ensure that the rules are being upheld during this crisis.

For those businesses which have an appropriate policy that covers government ordered closure and unspecified notifiable diseases, the Government’s social distancing instructions are sufficient to allow businesses to make a claim against their insurance, provided the other terms and conditions in their policy are met.

The FCA’s rules require insurers to handle claims fairly and promptly; provide reasonable guidance to help a policyholder make a claim, and appropriate information on its progress; not reject a claim unreasonably; and settle claims promptly once settlement terms are agreed. In addition, the FCA has said that, in light of COVID-19, insurers must consider very carefully the needs of their customers and show flexibility in their treatment of them.

Furthermore, on 15 April, FCA sent a letter to the insurance industry, setting out the FCA's expectation of firms regarding their handling of business interruption insurance claims, urging insurers to settle claims quickly in cases where there was a clear obligation to pay the claim in full or in part.

In addition, on 1 May, the FCA published a statement setting out their intention to seek legal clarity on the handling of business interruption insurance claims, in order to resolve any doubt for businesses facing uncertainty on their claims. In their statement the FCA also noted that insurers should look at how they can help consumers who are experiencing financial distress as a result of COVID-19.

However, most businesses have not purchased insurance that covers losses from COVID-19. Insurance policies differ significantly, so businesses are encouraged to check the terms and conditions of their specific policy and contact their providers.

The Government recognises that businesses who do not have appropriate insurance cover will require support from elsewhere. As such, businesses should explore the full package of support set out by the Chancellor, which includes measures such as business rates holidays, the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme, and wage support.

One of the Government’s most important duties is to ensure that residents – including leaseholders – feel safe and secure in their homes. That is why the Budget announced £1bn of additional funding to remove unsafe non-ACM cladding from private and social sector residential buildings above 18 metres. The Government expects building owners who have already committed to fund remedial works without passing on the costs to leaseholders to stick to these commitments.

The Equality Act 2010 prohibits firms from discriminating against consumers with most protected characteristics, one of which is race. Insurers can only discriminate based on a limited range of characteristics if they can provide objective, accurate, and reliable evidence that the consumer is at a higher risk of making a claim, and if the information they used to assess the application was used in a reasonable way.

Furthermore, firms are required to treat consumers fairly under the Financial Conduct Authority’s rules. The FCA is empowered to address misconduct, and where this has occurred it can undertake full investigations, and as a result impose financial penalties or even order firms to cease certain activities.

The Equality Act 2010 prohibits firms from discriminating against consumers with most protected characteristics, one of which is race. Insurers can only discriminate based on a limited range of characteristics if they can provide objective, accurate, and reliable evidence that the consumer is at a higher risk of making a claim, and if the information they used to assess the application was used in a reasonable way.

Furthermore, firms are required to treat consumers fairly under the Financial Conduct Authority’s rules. The FCA is empowered to address misconduct, and where this has occurred it can undertake full investigations, and as a result impose financial penalties or even order firms to cease certain activities.

The Equality Act 2010 prohibits firms from discriminating against consumers with most protected characteristics, one of which is race. Insurers can only discriminate based on a limited range of characteristics if they can provide objective, accurate, and reliable evidence that the consumer is at a higher risk of making a claim, and if the information they used to assess the application was used in a reasonable way.

Furthermore, firms are required to treat consumers fairly under the Financial Conduct Authority’s rules. The FCA is empowered to address misconduct, and where this has occurred it can undertake full investigations, and as a result impose financial penalties or even order firms to cease certain activities.

The Government is in the final stages of producing its response to the consultation on Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) and aims to publish the document as soon as possible.

The Home Office does not hold the information requested.

Since the end of Operation Pitting, our helpline for non-British nationals in Afghanistan has provided information and support on the UK’s evacuation efforts, as well as general information about the relocation schemes, to 5.8 million callers.

We are working across government and with partners such as UNHCR to design the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS), amidst a complex and changing picture. We are committed to working in step with the international community to get this right, and we will set out more details soon.

The first to be resettled through the ACRS will be some of those who arrived in the UK under the evacuation programme, which included individuals who were considered to be at particular risk.

There will not be a formal Home Office owned application process for the ACRS. Instead, eligible people will be prioritised and referred for resettlement to the UK as set out in the policy statement published on gov.uk on 13 September, available at www.gov.uk/government/publications/afghanistan-resettlement-and-immigration-policy-statement.

We are working across government and with partners such as UNHCR to design the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme (ACRS), amidst a complex and changing picture. We are committed to working in step with the international community to get this right, and we will set out more details soon.

The first to be resettled through the ACRS will be some of those who arrived in the UK under the evacuation programme, which included individuals who were considered to be at particular risk.

There will not be a formal Home Office owned application process for the ACRS. Instead, eligible people will be prioritised and referred for resettlement to the UK as set out in the policy statement published on gov.uk on 13 September, available at www.gov.uk/government/publications/afghanistan-resettlement-and-immigration-policy-statement.

The Home Office is committed to ensuring all applications are considered without unnecessary delay. Information on our immigration routes with service standards and whether they have been processed against these standards is available as part of our transparency data, at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/migration-transparency-data

If an application is deemed complex and expected to take longer than the standard processing timescale, UKVI will write to the customer within the standard processing time and explain what will happen next. The published information on processing times for complex/ non straightforward visa applications is published as part of the Migration Transparency data, at the above link.

All asylum claims are carefully considered on their individual merits on the evidence available to the decision maker. Although we concentrate on oldest cases there may be reasons where some applications may be prioritised due to several factors such as vulnerability. Delays may also occur where we require further information/investigations before a decision can be made on the application.

The Home Office issues an information leaflet to asylum claimants at the point of claim which outlines the asylum process and the claimant’s responsibilities within the process. This information leaflet is periodically reviewed. Independent guidance and advice are also available to asylum claimants provided by Migrant Help.

Migrant Help are present in initial accommodation where destitute asylum seekers are initially housed and their services can also be accessed via their website or by phone. Their website is available in multiple languages, and the helpline is free and accessible in multiple languages.

UKVI work closely with our key partners and stakeholders to seek and share feedback to identify ways in which we can improve the quality of experience of people seeking asylum in the UK. Our Customer Experience Management Team, based across the UK, work closely on a local level with stakeholders, to identify key areas to improve the overall experience for people seeking asylum in the UK.

The Home Office is committed to ensuring all applications are considered without unnecessary delay. Information on our immigration routes with service standards and whether they have been processed against these standards is available as part of our transparency data, at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/migration-transparency-data

If an application is deemed complex and expected to take longer than the standard processing timescale, UKVI will write to the customer within the standard processing time and explain what will happen next. The published information on processing times for complex/ non straightforward visa applications is published as part of the Migration Transparency data, at the above link.

All asylum claims are carefully considered on their individual merits on the evidence available to the decision maker. Although we concentrate on oldest cases there may be reasons where some applications may be prioritised due to several factors such as vulnerability. Delays may also occur where we require further information/investigations before a decision can be made on the application.

The Home Office issues an information leaflet to asylum claimants at the point of claim which outlines the asylum process and the claimant’s responsibilities within the process. This information leaflet is periodically reviewed. Independent guidance and advice are also available to asylum claimants provided by Migrant Help.

Migrant Help are present in initial accommodation where destitute asylum seekers are initially housed and their services can also be accessed via their website or by phone. Their website is available in multiple languages, and the helpline is free and accessible in multiple languages.

UKVI work closely with our key partners and stakeholders to seek and share feedback to identify ways in which we can improve the quality of experience of people seeking asylum in the UK. Our Customer Experience Management Team, based across the UK, work closely on a local level with stakeholders, to identify key areas to improve the overall experience for people seeking asylum in the UK.

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the FSO), the Responsible Person for each building is required to ensure appropriate fire safety measures are in place within their building. If a responsible person uses a waking watch as part of a wider building fire safety strategy to mitigate the risks in a particular building, as informed by a fire risk assessment, it is for them to ensure its adequacy.

The Government and NFCC make available guidance to support those responsible in complying with the FSO and ensuring their premises remain safe for continued use but does not monitor service providers. The National Fire Chiefs Council has recently revised its Simultaneous Evacuation Guidance which reflects best practice and can be located at https://www.nationalfirechiefs.org.uk/Simultaneous-evacuation-guidance.

This guidance encourages greater use of more cost-effective measures such as alarm systems to replace or reduce dependency on waking watch wherever possible.

Local fire and rescue authorities and other enforcers of the FSO can take action where the fire safety measures fall short of compliance.

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the FSO), the Responsible Person for each building is required to ensure appropriate fire safety measures are in place within their building. If a responsible person uses a waking watch as part of a wider building fire safety strategy to mitigate the risks in a particular building, as informed by a fire risk assessment, it is for them to ensure its adequacy.

The Government and NFCC make available guidance to support those responsible in complying with the FSO and ensuring their premises remain safe for continued use but does not monitor service providers. The National Fire Chiefs Council has recently revised its Simultaneous Evacuation Guidance which reflects best practice and can be located at https://www.nationalfirechiefs.org.uk/Simultaneous-evacuation-guidance.

This guidance encourages greater use of more cost-effective measures such as alarm systems to replace or reduce dependency on waking watch wherever possible.

Local fire and rescue authorities and other enforcers of the FSO can take action where the fire safety measures fall short of compliance.

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the FSO), the Responsible Person for each building is required to ensure appropriate fire safety measures are in place within their building. If a responsible person uses a waking watch as part of a wider building fire safety strategy to mitigate the risks in a particular building, as informed by a fire risk assessment, it is for them to ensure its adequacy.

The Government and NFCC make available guidance to support those responsible in complying with the FSO and ensuring their premises remain safe for continued use but does not monitor service providers. The National Fire Chiefs Council has recently revised its Simultaneous Evacuation Guidance which reflects best practice and can be located at https://www.nationalfirechiefs.org.uk/Simultaneous-evacuation-guidance.

This guidance encourages greater use of more cost-effective measures such as alarm systems to replace or reduce dependency on waking watch wherever possible.

Local fire and rescue authorities and other enforcers of the FSO can take action where the fire safety measures fall short of compliance.

Under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 (the FSO), the Responsible Person for each building is required to ensure appropriate fire safety measures are in place within their building. If a responsible person uses a waking watch as part of a wider building fire safety strategy to mitigate the risks in a particular building, as informed by a fire risk assessment, it is for them to ensure its adequacy.

The Government and NFCC make available guidance to support those responsible in complying with the FSO and ensuring their premises remain safe for continued use but does not monitor service providers. The National Fire Chiefs Council has recently revised its Simultaneous Evacuation Guidance which reflects best practice and can be located at https://www.nationalfirechiefs.org.uk/Simultaneous-evacuation-guidance.

This guidance encourages greater use of more cost-effective measures such as alarm systems to replace or reduce dependency on waking watch wherever possible.

Local fire and rescue authorities and other enforcers of the FSO can take action where the fire safety measures fall short of compliance.

The Home Office will be consulting on Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) in high-rise residential settings shortly. This consultation follows the recent Fire Safety Consultation (FSC) which sought views on the recommendations in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 Report, details of this consultation can be found here.

Border Force does not routinely publish this level of data on the specific type of tobacco seized at the border.

Seizures relating to products related to the Tax revenue that is protected through detecting goods where excise duty has not been declared, including Tobacco seizures are published quarterly on the.gov.uk website. The latest information can be found at:

Border Force Transparency Data August 2020

The latest published Immigration Statistics detail the number of asylum seekers accommodated in each local authority area, which includes those in hotel and wider government facilities. These statistics can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/asylum-and-resettlement-datasets#asylum-support

Data is published on a quarterly basis, with the latest information published 26 November 2020. The next quarterly figures are due to be released in February 2021.

The Home Office does not publish a breakdown of these statistics which disaggregates the number of children and vulnerable people based on medical grounds. These figures are not available in a reportable format and to provide the information could only be done at disproportionate cost.

Birmingham has been a dispersal area for a number of years, and we do not hold records of the engagement held.

With regards to current dispersal, the Home Office is working in partnership with Local Authority Chief Executives through the Home Office Local Government Chief Executive group’s, who have agreed a change plan, that seeks to achieve a more equitable dispersal of asylum seekers across the UK and seeks to overcome barriers to ensure availability of service provision.

The plan has been paused in light of the current covid-19 crisis but will resume once restrictions on accommodation moves have been lifted.

Birmingham has been a dispersal area for a number of years, and we do not hold records of the engagement held.

With regards to current dispersal, the Home Office is working in partnership with Local Authority Chief Executives through the Home Office Local Government Chief Executive group’s, who have agreed a change plan, that seeks to achieve a more equitable dispersal of asylum seekers across the UK and seeks to overcome barriers to ensure availability of service provision.

The plan has been paused in light of the current covid-19 crisis but will resume once restrictions on accommodation moves have been lifted.

The letter referred to in the questions (M560/20) was regarding the use of the Rowton Hotel as contingency accommodation and was responded to in February 2020.

Due to the Covid 19 crisis and the pause on cessations of asylum support there was a growth in the number of people needing accommodation and that in order to meet that growth, we would have to procure hotel accommodation as contingency and hotel use in Birmingham has continued. The use of hotels as contingency accommodation is temporary and once restrictions on movement are lifted, the providers will work to move all individuals in contingency accommodation into suitable accommodation.

We will programme the reduction of the number of people in supported accommodation in a controlled manner. Consideration will be given to the needs of service users whilst balancing the impact of increased accommodation pressures on local authorities. We intend to work collaboratively with local authorities as we transition out of lockdown.

A reply was sent by the Minister for Crime and Policing on 25 September 2020.

The letter referred to in the questions (M560/20) was regarding the use of the Rowton Hotel as contingency accommodation and was responded to in February 2020.

Due to the Covid 19 crisis and the pause on cessations of asylum support there was a growth in the number of people needing accommodation and that in order to meet that growth, we would have to procure hotel accommodation as contingency and hotel use in Birmingham has continued. The use of hotels as contingency accommodation is temporary and once restrictions on movement are lifted, the providers will work to move all individuals in contingency accommodation into suitable accommodation.

We will programme the reduction of the number of people in supported accommodation in a controlled manner. Consideration will be given to the needs of service users whilst balancing the impact of increased accommodation pressures on local authorities. We intend to work collaboratively with local authorities as we transition out of lockdown.

• The Department for Education funds English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) through the Adult Education Budget (AEB).

• Individuals aged 19 and over, including refugees, those granted humanitarian protection and asylum seekers, can be fully funded or co-funded depending on their age, prior educational attainment, employment status, and provided they meet the residency criteria set out in the AEB Funding and Performance Management Rules.

• Approximately half the AEB is devolved to six Mayoral Combined Authorities and the Greater London Authority, and they are responsible for commissioning and funding provision, including ESOL provision, for learners resident in their areas.

• As well as access to mainstream services, additional funding is provided to Local Authorities (of £850 per adult refugee) for refugees resettled through the UK’s resettlement scheme. This is intended to boost local capacity so that refugees on the scheme can receive additional hours of ESOL tuition.

• We are also investing around £600,000 this year (2020/21) so that refugees on the UK Resettlement Scheme can benefit from additional childcare provision to support access to ESOL classes; and £360,000 to improve regional coordination of ESOL for refugees.

The Home Office is working in partnership with Local Authority Chief Executives ?through the Home Office Local Government Chief Executive group’s, who have agreed a change plan, that seeks to achieve a more equitable dispersal of asylum seekers across the UK and seeks to overcome barriers to ensure availability of service provision.

The plan has been paused in light of the current covid-19 crisis but will resume once restrictions on accommodation moves have been lifted.

The Home Office publishes quarterly figures on the number of asylum seekers housed in dispersed accommodation, by local authority in the Immigration Statistics release, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/asylum-and-resettlement-datasets#asylum-support

In October 2019 Home Office confirmed officer allocations for every force in England and Wales in the first year of the uplift. The Home Office is working with the National Police Chiefs’ Council to support all forces deliver these allocations.

West Midlands Police has been allocated 366 officers in year 1 of the uplift.

The Home Office publishes the statistical series 'Police workforce, England and Wales' on a biannual basis. The next publication is scheduled for release on Thursday 30 January and will contain information on the number of officers in post as at 30 September 2019. Data on joiners and leavers are published annually, in the July release of the bulletin, which covers the situation as at 31 March.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/home-office-announces-first-wave-of-20000-police-officer-uplift

The EU Settlement scheme is free, there is plenty of support for applicants and EU citizens have until the end of June 2021 to apply.

The latest published information shows that more than 2.7 million (2,756,100) EU Settlement Scheme applications had been received up to 31 December 2019. The latest figures can be found in the Home Office’s ‘EU Settlement Scheme monthly statistics’ available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/eu-settlement-scheme-statistics-december-2019

In order to ensure that resident EEA nationals and their family members understand how and by when to apply to the EU Settlement Scheme, the Home Office has put in place a comprehensive communications and engagement plan, using all available channels to reach our audiences – such as marketing, presentations, email updates, toolkits and webinars.

The Home Office has delivered a £4 million marketing campaign to encourage resident EEA nationals to apply and further campaign activity is planned. Alongside this campaign activity, we have also undertaken extensive engagement and outreach with stakeholder groups, including employers, local authorities and community organisations. No-one will be left behind, which is why we are working in partnership with representatives of vulnerable groups and other experts to make sure everyone knows what they need to do and has the right level of support.

Guidance published by the National Fire Chiefs Council recommends that a Waking Watch should only be in place for a short period of time in those buildings where the fire safety strategy has moved from 'stay put' to 'simultaneous evacuation'.

The guidance is clear that the Responsible Person should move quickly to install a common fire alarm system as they are a more cost effective and reliable option. On 17 December the Secretary of State announced a £30 million Waking Watch Relief fund to pay for the costs of installing a common fire alarm system in residential buildings in England taller than 18 meters with unsafe cladding, to remove costly Waking Watch measures.

The Government's proposed changes to the Defective Premises Act 1972 as part of the Building Safety Bill will more than double the time available to seek compensation for substandard building work from six to 15 years. These new measures will provide a legal route to redress that previously would not have been possible for hundreds of buildings, benefitting thousands of leaseholders.

There are various limitation periods set in the Limitation Act 1980 for different types of civil claim. These range from 12 months (for defamation or the late payment of insurance claims) to six years (for claims relating to some types of contracts) to a long stop of 15 years for cases involving negligence. A 15-year limitation period has been chosen to bring the Defective Premises Act in line with other types of serious civil claim.

The Government has been clear that those responsible must pay towards the cost of remediating defective buildings. It is fundamental that the industry that caused this issue contributes to setting things right. Some parts of the industry have done the right thing, funding remediation of serious historic defects, but this is not happening in all cases. In many cases, those who caused the problems are evading responsibility. That is why we are taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.

Along with retrospectively extending the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act, going forward we are also expanding the Defective Premises Act to include refurbishments, and we will be commencing section 38 of the Building Act 1984. These measures will also be subject to a 15-year limitation period. Together, these increased rights to redress will enhance accountability, with stronger incentives against shoddy workmanship, further reinforcing the culture change in the construction industry that the Building Safety Bill will drive.

These reforms are supported by more than £5 billion in direct grant funding for the remediation of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings, where the risk to multiple households is greater when fire does spread; a significant proportion of this is funding the delivery of construction works now, or has funded work which has finished.

The Government's proposed changes to the Defective Premises Act 1972 as part of the Building Safety Bill will more than double the time available to seek compensation for substandard building work from six to 15 years. These new measures will provide a legal route to redress that previously would not have been possible for hundreds of buildings, benefitting thousands of leaseholders.

There are various limitation periods set in the Limitation Act 1980 for different types of civil claim. These range from 12 months (for defamation or the late payment of insurance claims) to six years (for claims relating to some types of contracts) to a long stop of 15 years for cases involving negligence. A 15-year limitation period has been chosen to bring the Defective Premises Act in line with other types of serious civil claim.

The Government has been clear that those responsible must pay towards the cost of remediating defective buildings. It is fundamental that the industry that caused this issue contributes to setting things right. Some parts of the industry have done the right thing, funding remediation of serious historic defects, but this is not happening in all cases. In many cases, those who caused the problems are evading responsibility. That is why we are taking action, providing a route to redress so that those who caused these problems can be held accountable.

Along with retrospectively extending the limitation period under the Defective Premises Act, going forward we are also expanding the Defective Premises Act to include refurbishments, and we will be commencing section 38 of the Building Act 1984. These measures will also be subject to a 15-year limitation period. Together, these increased rights to redress will enhance accountability, with stronger incentives against shoddy workmanship, further reinforcing the culture change in the construction industry that the Building Safety Bill will drive.

These reforms are supported by more than £5 billion in direct grant funding for the remediation of dangerous cladding on high-rise buildings, where the risk to multiple households is greater when fire does spread; a significant proportion of this is funding the delivery of construction works now, or has funded work which has finished.

On 10 March 2021 we issued a letter to fire safety professionals and building control bodies reminding them that Kingspan has retracted three test reports. The letter is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/letter-to-building-control-bodies-on-the-retraction-of-three-tests-carried-out-on-kingspan-k15-insulation

The letter recommends that fire safety professionals and buildings control bodies review their records to check that any assessments they have carried out using these tests are identified and revisited in light of the information highlighted during the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. The content of this letter is not new and is simply a reminder of the steps they should take in light of this information.

On 5 July 2021, the Government introduced the Building Safety Bill which set out the biggest reforms to building safety regulation for a generation, including provisions to strengthen and extend the scope of the powers available to the Government to regulate construction products.

The Bill will require manufacturers to ensure that their products are safe before putting them on the United Kingdom market. It also paves the way for a national regulator for construction products being set up within the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) to oversee the new regime. The regulator will have robust inspection, market surveillance and enforcement capability so unsafe products can be removed from the market.

The Government is assured that most major lenders, about 80% of the mortgage market, have adopted the approach in the RICS EWS1 guidance or already take a significantly less risk averse approach. The Government has not said that 20% of lenders have not adopted the RICS EWS1 guidance: our efforts have been focussed on the lenders with the largest share of the market, so this does not necessarily mean that the remaining 20% of market share, made up of much smaller lenders, are not using the RICS guidance.

The Department frequently engages with the industry and will continue to challenge them on the use of the EWS1 process, as well as pressing for more data transparency on how the RICS guidance is being applied, and the effect of the process on mortgage applications. We already know, via data from one major lender, that an EWS1 already exists for 50% of mortgage applications where one is requested, and we are working with industry to ensure this picture only improves.

We will continue to work with lenders to enable them to understand and accept other forms of assurance such as a comprehensive fire risk assessment which includes the external walls or post 2018 building control sign off for high rise blocks.

The Government is assured that most major lenders, about 80% of the mortgage market, have adopted the approach in the RICS EWS1 guidance or already take a significantly less risk averse approach. The Government has not said that 20% of lenders have not adopted the RICS EWS1 guidance: our efforts have been focussed on the lenders with the largest share of the market, so this does not necessarily mean that the remaining 20% of market share, made up of much smaller lenders, are not using the RICS guidance.

The Department frequently engages with the industry and will continue to challenge them on the use of the EWS1 process, as well as pressing for more data transparency on how the RICS guidance is being applied, and the effect of the process on mortgage applications. We already know, via data from one major lender, that an EWS1 already exists for 50% of mortgage applications where one is requested, and we are working with industry to ensure this picture only improves.

We will continue to work with lenders to enable them to understand and accept other forms of assurance such as a comprehensive fire risk assessment which includes the external walls or post 2018 building control sign off for high rise blocks.

The Government is assured that most major lenders, about 80% of the mortgage market, have adopted the approach in the RICS EWS1 guidance or already take a significantly less risk averse approach. The Government has not said that 20% of lenders have not adopted the RICS EWS1 guidance: our efforts have been focussed on the lenders with the largest share of the market, so this does not necessarily mean that the remaining 20% of market share, made up of much smaller lenders, are not using the RICS guidance.

The Department frequently engages with the industry and will continue to challenge them on the use of the EWS1 process, as well as pressing for more data transparency on how the RICS guidance is being applied, and the effect of the process on mortgage applications. We already know, via data from one major lender, that an EWS1 already exists for 50% of mortgage applications where one is requested, and we are working with industry to ensure this picture only improves.

We will continue to work with lenders to enable them to understand and accept other forms of assurance such as a comprehensive fire risk assessment which includes the external walls or post 2018 building control sign off for high rise blocks.

The Government is assured that most major lenders, about 80% of the mortgage market, have adopted the approach in the RICS EWS1 guidance or already take a significantly less risk averse approach. The Government has not said that 20% of lenders have not adopted the RICS EWS1 guidance: our efforts have been focussed on the lenders with the largest share of the market, so this does not necessarily mean that the remaining 20% of market share, made up of much smaller lenders, are not using the RICS guidance.

The Department frequently engages with the industry and will continue to challenge them on the use of the EWS1 process, as well as pressing for more data transparency on how the RICS guidance is being applied, and the effect of the process on mortgage applications. We already know, via data from one major lender, that an EWS1 already exists for 50% of mortgage applications where one is requested, and we are working with industry to ensure this picture only improves.

We will continue to work with lenders to enable them to understand and accept other forms of assurance such as a comprehensive fire risk assessment which includes the external walls or post 2018 building control sign off for high rise blocks.

Department officials are currently using their ongoing engagement with industry to ensure that any potential implications for the remediation programme are understood and action is taken where needed to ensure that the Government’s priorities for building safety are met.

My Department is working hard to improve standards in the private parking industry. Last year we launched public consultations on our proposals for the new Parking Code of Practice and Enforcement Framework, designed to ensure fairness across the board.

The Government published its response to its consultation on the Code Enforcement Framework on 20 March 2021, announcing our intention to deliver a series of parking measures which will benefit motorists and encourage people to return to our high streets and town centres.

We will continue to discuss the detail of the Code of Practice and the proposed approach in the consultation response on parking charges with all interested parties including key motoring and industry bodies.

We are continuing to develop a financing scheme using a range of evidence to ensure that it protects all types of leaseholders and will prioritise affordability and accelerate remediation. We are working on the underpinning details and will announce further information as soon as we are in a position to do so.

We are continuing to develop a financing scheme using a range of evidence to ensure that it protects all types of leaseholders and will prioritise affordability and accelerate remediation. We are working on the underpinning details and will announce further information as soon as we are in a position to do so.

Anyone can already apply for a Disabled Facilities Grant to contribute to the capital cost of adapting their home, including to facilitate access in and out of their building or around the common parts of their building, subject to a needs assessment, eligibility criteria, and a means test. This includes in buildings at risk of fire safety faults.

Under the Building Safety Programme, the Government has intervened with an unprecedented over £5 billion investment in building safety, to fully fund the remediation of unsafe cladding for leaseholders in all residential buildings 18 metres and over in England. Lower rise buildings, with a lower risk to safety, will also gain new protection from costs of cladding removal with a generous new scheme offered to buildings between 11 and 18 metres in height. We have also launched a £30 million fund to install fire alarms in high-rise buildings, relieving residents of waking watch costs.

The Government-funded Disabled Facilities Grant can contribute to the capital cost of adapting an eligible persons home, including to facilitate access in and out of their building or around the common parts of their building, subject to a needs assessment, eligibility criteria, and a means test. This includes in buildings at risk of fire safety faults.

The Fire Safety Order (FSO) applies to the non-domestic parts of multi occupied residential premises. Responsible Persons (who may be building owners) under the FSO have a duty to take such general fire precautions as are reasonably required to ensure the safety of premises. Such precautions include measures to reduce the risk of fire on the premises, measures relating to means of escape from the premises and ensuring these can be safely and effectively used, and measures to mitigate the effect of fire.

Matters concerning the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 are the responsibility of Cabinet Office, including the grounds for the exclusion of bidders from public procurement procedures that are set out within the regulations.

These rules set out the circumstances in which bidders must, or may, be excluded from a public procurement process for a variety of criminal offences and in other specific situations. Decisions need to be based around firm evidence and individual contracting authorities, including local authorities, are responsible for their own decisions on these matters.

The Green Paper “Transforming Government Procurement” includes a package of proposals to bolster the existing exclusion grounds, including discretionary measures to exclude for poor past performance even if it had not led to termination, damages or comparable sanctions. The Government will also investigate the feasibility of developing a centrally managed debarment list of suppliers who have relevant convictions to make it easier for contracting authorities to identify organisations that must be excluded from public procurement. Detailed analysis of the consultation responses will follow in due course.

More widely, it is also clear that further measures must be put in place to prevent unsafe products being placed on the market and there must be action against companies which advertise and sell unsafe products, or who game the testing regime.

That is why we have brought forward proposals to strengthen the regulation of construction products in the draft Building Safety Bill. We have also announced in January a new national regulator for construction products, and a review into the construction product testing regime. We expect all public suppliers to act with integrity and to high standards, and will act where we see standards falling short.

Matters concerning the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 are the responsibility of Cabinet Office, including the grounds for the exclusion of bidders from public procurement procedures that are set out within the regulations.

These rules set out the circumstances in which bidders must, or may, be excluded from a public procurement process for a variety of criminal offences and in other specific situations. Decisions need to be based around firm evidence and individual contracting authorities, including local authorities, are responsible for their own decisions on these matters.

The Green Paper “Transforming Government Procurement” includes a package of proposals to bolster the existing exclusion grounds, including discretionary measures to exclude for poor past performance even if it had not led to termination, damages or comparable sanctions. The Government will also investigate the feasibility of developing a centrally managed debarment list of suppliers who have relevant convictions to make it easier for contracting authorities to identify organisations that must be excluded from public procurement. Detailed analysis of the consultation responses will follow in due course.

More widely, it is also clear that further measures must be put in place to prevent unsafe products being placed on the market and there must be action against companies which advertise and sell unsafe products, or who game the testing regime.

That is why we have brought forward proposals to strengthen the regulation of construction products in the draft Building Safety Bill. We have also announced in January a new national regulator for construction products, and a review into the construction product testing regime. We expect all public suppliers to act with integrity and to high standards, and will act where we see standards falling short.

Matters concerning the Public Contracts Regulations 2015 are the responsibility of Cabinet Office, including the grounds for the exclusion of bidders from public procurement procedures that are set out within the regulations.

These rules set out the circumstances in which bidders must, or may, be excluded from a public procurement process for a variety of criminal offences and in other specific situations. Decisions need to be based around firm evidence and individual contracting authorities, including local authorities, are responsible for their own decisions on these matters.

The Green Paper “Transforming Government Procurement” includes a package of proposals to bolster the existing exclusion grounds, including discretionary measures to exclude for poor past performance even if it had not led to termination, damages or comparable sanctions. The Government will also investigate the feasibility of developing a centrally managed debarment list of suppliers who have relevant convictions to make it easier for contracting authorities to identify organisations that must be excluded from public procurement. Detailed analysis of the consultation responses will follow in due course.

More widely, it is also clear that further measures must be put in place to prevent unsafe products being placed on the market and there must be action against companies which advertise and sell unsafe products, or who game the testing regime.

That is why we have brought forward proposals to strengthen the regulation of construction products in the draft Building Safety Bill. We have also announced in January a new national regulator for construction products, and a review into the construction product testing regime. We expect all public suppliers to act with integrity and to high standards, and will act where we see standards falling short.

The Department published registration statistics for the Building Safety Fund on 11 February 2021, which includes information on the number of eligible and ineligible registrations to the fund and allocations made, and can be found at: www.gov.uk/guidance/remediation-of-non-acm-buildings#building-safety-fund-registration-statistics . It covers the period between the Fund’s opening for registrations in June 2020 to present.

Information on the number of Help to Buy equity loan properties with ACM cladding can be found in the NAO’s report entitled Investigation into remediating dangerous cladding on high‑rise buildings, which is available at https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Investigation-into-remediating-dangerous-cladding-on-high-rise-buildings.pdf. Data at constituency level is not available.

Homes England does not assess the risk of default for this cohort as the homes can be valued and redeemed as normal.

There is no information available regarding purchases made using Help to Buy ISAs or Lifetime ISAs concerning homes bought in high-rise buildings. Neither is there any information available concerning the effect of cladding and/or fire safety issues on homes with Help to Buy equity loans other than for ACM cladding, as stated above.

Information on the number of Help to Buy equity loan properties with ACM cladding can be found in the NAO’s report entitled Investigation into remediating dangerous cladding on high‑rise buildings, which is available at https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Investigation-into-remediating-dangerous-cladding-on-high-rise-buildings.pdf. Data at constituency level is not available.

Homes England does not assess the risk of default for this cohort as the homes can be valued and redeemed as normal.

There is no information available regarding purchases made using Help to Buy ISAs or Lifetime ISAs concerning homes bought in high-rise buildings. Neither is there any information available concerning the effect of cladding and/or fire safety issues on homes with Help to Buy equity loans other than for ACM cladding, as stated above.

Information on the number of Help to Buy equity loan properties with ACM cladding can be found in the NAO’s report entitled Investigation into remediating dangerous cladding on high‑rise buildings, which is available at https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Investigation-into-remediating-dangerous-cladding-on-high-rise-buildings.pdf. Data at constituency level is not available.

Homes England does not assess the risk of default for this cohort as the homes can be valued and redeemed as normal.

There is no information available regarding purchases made using Help to Buy ISAs or Lifetime ISAs concerning homes bought in high-rise buildings. Neither is there any information available concerning the effect of cladding and/or fire safety issues on homes with Help to Buy equity loans other than for ACM cladding, as stated above.

The Government has continued to engage with leaseholders of all kinds at Ministerial and official level, including shared owners, to understand their concerns on a range of issues and discuss various policies.

It is unacceptable for leaseholders to have to worry about the cost of fixing historic safety defects in their buildings that they did not cause.

The Government is determined to remove barriers to fixing historic defects and identify financing solutions that help to protect leaseholders, whilst also helping to protect the taxpayer. We will provide an update as soon as we are in a position to do so.

There are no current plans for the Government to routinely collect centralised data. We continue to empower local authorities to plan for how to best meet the needs of local citizens without burdening them with extensive data and reporting requirements.

We are funding five local authorities to test approaches to developing strategic assessments of need and supply locally, which will improve oversight of local supported housing markets. We are working closely with the local authorities to design these plans and to capture best practice that can be shared more widely and inform future supported housing policy decision making.

My Department is funding five local authorities to test approaches to improving quality and value for money in supported housing . The five are Birmingham, Bristol, Blackpool, Blackburn and Hull.

All five areas are receiving funding to undertake three core activities: enforcement action through multi-disciplinary teams to improve accommodation standards; enhanced scrutiny of Housing Benefit claims and making improvements to support provision; and data collection to underpin a strategic local need and supply assessment.

Each area is also undertaking additional activities to drive up quality in their area, developed to meet their specific needs. For example, Birmingham City Council has been developing a set of Quality Standards for supported housing and a Charter of Rights for residents that will be launched shortly. We will use data and information from these to inform our future thinking about national approaches.

My Department is working closely with local authorities to deliver the pilots including regularly reviewing the strategic objectives of improving local accommodation standards, value for money and support provided to tenants.

We are collecting regular data to monitor progress and the results of activity. This includes the number of property inspections completed, the number of tenant support reviews conducted, the number of local authority actions taken to improve accommodation standards, and action taken to improve support, and data on Housing Benefit claims and spend.

We are also committed to a full, rigorous, independent evaluation of the pilots, and of the impact of the £3.1 million we have awarded to local authorities. The evaluation will ensure that we can measure the impact of the interventions tested in the pilots and capture best practice from local authorities.