Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to introduce requirements for the installation of swift bricks in new housing developments.
Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 62367 on 2 July 2025.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made an assessment of the potential impact of the judgment in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 on Fellows of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice recognises that the judgment and its potential implications have created concern and uncertainty within parts of the legal profession, particularly among Chartered Institute of Legal Executive (CILEX) professionals.
Whilst the legal profession and its regulators operate independently of government, I have been proactively engaging with frontline regulators and representative bodies on the judgment’s implications and the action being taken in response. On 27 October, I convened a meeting with the Legal Services Board (LSB) and relevant frontline regulators to discuss the judgment, its implications, and the steps taken and underway. I have also met members of CILEX’s senior leadership team to discuss the judgment’s impact and attended their recent conference to hear from CILEX members what the impact has been.
While I am satisfied that appropriate steps are being taken to address the issues raised by the judgment, we will continue to work closely with the LSB, frontline regulators, and representative bodies to ensure clarity and consider whether further steps are required.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure that families affected by Primodos are not prevented from pursuing legal redress due to the potential risk of high legal costs.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government cannot comment on individual legal cases, but we are committed to access to justice at proportionate cost. There are several mechanisms that can reduce the legal costs involved in pursuing a civil claim. Whether any are available to a claimant would depend on the specifics of the claim.
Claimants may be able enter into an agreement with a lawyer using a Conditional Fee Agreement or Damages Based Agreement, or with a third party funder using a Litigation Funding Agreement. Such agreements usually mean that a claimant will not have to pay all or part of their own legal costs unless they win their case.
Claimants may be able to take out Legal Expenses Insurance and After the Event insurance to mitigate some of the financial risks associated with litigation. Such insurance would usually cover adverse legal costs, where the losing party in a claim is ordered to pay the legal costs of the other side.
Fixed Recoverable Costs are also applicable to most civil cases in the Fast and Intermediate Tracks. These allow parties to know in advance what adverse costs they would be liable for if they lose a case. This can help claimants make an informed decision about whether or not to pursue litigation.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps she is taking to ensure that companies receiving contracts for border activity are not contributing to foreign conflicts that cause displacement.
Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The UK promotes high standards for private security companies through voluntary international regulation. We supported the drafting of the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (2010) and the creation of the International Code of Conduct Association (ICoCA) in 2013 to oversee compliance. These initiatives ensure transparency, accountability, and due diligence, reducing risks that security providers contribute to conflict or displacement.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what assessment her Department has made of the affordability of employability courses for students; and whether she plans to increase funding to help improve access to such courses.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Approximately £8.6 billion 16 to 19 programme funding has been allocated during the 2025/26 academic year to colleges, schools and other providers of education and training. This funding enables young people to take part in study programmes or T levels. These are designed to enable students to progress to employment, an apprenticeship or further study including higher education.
Responsibility for adult skills has moved from the Department for Education to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Through the adult skills fund (ASF), we have allocated £1.4 billion in academic year 2025/26, ensuring that adults can access the education and training they need to get into employment or progress in work.
Currently, 68% of the ASF is devolved to 12 Strategic Authorities and the Greater London Authority, who are responsible for the provision of ASF-funded adult education for their residents and the allocation of the ASF to learning providers.
In non-devolved areas, adults who earn less than £25,750, are eligible for full funding through the ASF, ensuring courses are accessible for those who are either unemployed or on the lowest incomes.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that (a) NHS Surrey Heartlands Integrated Care Board and (b) other integrated care boards provide (i) adequate funding and (ii) clear guidance to general practitioners to support the implementation of shared care agreements for patients requiring ongoing medication.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Shared care arrangements between a general practitioner (GP) and a specialist are voluntary and are not part of the GP Contract. GPs do not receive additional funding for participating in shared care arrangements and may decline on clinical or capacity grounds.
Guidance issued by the General Medical Council supports GPs in deciding whether to accept shared care responsibilities, ensuring that any prescriptions or referrals are clinically appropriate. Where a GP does not enter into a shared care arrangement, responsibility for ongoing treatment, including prescribing, remains with the specialist clinician.
Integrated care boards (ICBs), including the NHS Surrey Heartlands ICB, are responsible for arranging health services in line with local population needs and relevant guidance. ICBs follow NHS England’s guidance on shared care protocols, including the Responsibility for Prescribing Between Primary and Secondary/Tertiary Care framework. Within the NHS Surrey Heartlands ICB this framework is overseen by the Surrey Heartlands Medicines Optimisation Group. Implementation may vary between GPs due to factors such as clinical capacity, digital infrastructure, and local agreements. Regarding funding, the ICB’s approach is consistent with national policy expectations that integrated care systems should ensure equitable access to medicines and safe, sustainable shared care arrangements.
Whilst a specific assessment has not been undertaken, to support consistency of access, the Department’s Fit for the Future: 10-Year Health Plan for England, published on 3 July 2025, sets out plans for a Single National Formulary (SNF) for medicines. The SNF will replace the current system of local formularies, with a national oversight board sequencing products based on clinical and cost-effectiveness, supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. This approach is intended to drive rapid and equitable adoption of the most clinically and cost-effective medicines across England.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has made an assessment of the extent of regional variations in access to (a) shared care agreements and (b) prescribed treatments; and what steps he is taking to help ensure consistency of access to these in all integrated care boards.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Shared care arrangements between a general practitioner (GP) and a specialist are voluntary and are not part of the GP Contract. GPs do not receive additional funding for participating in shared care arrangements and may decline on clinical or capacity grounds.
Guidance issued by the General Medical Council supports GPs in deciding whether to accept shared care responsibilities, ensuring that any prescriptions or referrals are clinically appropriate. Where a GP does not enter into a shared care arrangement, responsibility for ongoing treatment, including prescribing, remains with the specialist clinician.
Integrated care boards (ICBs), including the NHS Surrey Heartlands ICB, are responsible for arranging health services in line with local population needs and relevant guidance. ICBs follow NHS England’s guidance on shared care protocols, including the Responsibility for Prescribing Between Primary and Secondary/Tertiary Care framework. Within the NHS Surrey Heartlands ICB this framework is overseen by the Surrey Heartlands Medicines Optimisation Group. Implementation may vary between GPs due to factors such as clinical capacity, digital infrastructure, and local agreements. Regarding funding, the ICB’s approach is consistent with national policy expectations that integrated care systems should ensure equitable access to medicines and safe, sustainable shared care arrangements.
Whilst a specific assessment has not been undertaken, to support consistency of access, the Department’s Fit for the Future: 10-Year Health Plan for England, published on 3 July 2025, sets out plans for a Single National Formulary (SNF) for medicines. The SNF will replace the current system of local formularies, with a national oversight board sequencing products based on clinical and cost-effectiveness, supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. This approach is intended to drive rapid and equitable adoption of the most clinically and cost-effective medicines across England.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, when he plans to publish an updated timeline for the implementation of the (a) deposit return scheme and (b) extended producer responsibility schemes.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
Our Extended Producer Responsibility scheme for packaging came into force in January, and notices of liabilities have recently been issued. From 2026 fee modulation will be introduced to encourage producers to use more recyclable and sustainable packaging.
The Deposit Return Scheme regulations for England and Northern Ireland came into force in January 2025, and June 2025 by Scottish Government, to run the Deposit Return Scheme. The scheme will launch in England, Northern Ireland, and Scotland in October 2027.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, whether he plans to review the application of the long-term empty homes council tax premium in cases where (a) properties are awaiting sale, (b) the owner is serving in the armed forces and required to live on base and (c) properties are empty due to other circumstances outside the owner’s control.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
It is for councils to decide whether to charge the premium in their area, taking account of local circumstances. The Department has introduced a number of exceptions to the empty homes premium which came into effect from April 2025. These include exceptions for up to a year for dwellings actively marketed for sale or let and for dwellings which is or would be the sole or main residence of a member of the armed services, who has been provided with a dwelling as a result of such service. In addition to mandatory exceptions councils have the discretionary power to set their own local exceptions to premiums or offer discounts. The government has published guidance on the implementation of premiums and exceptions and is available here.
The government remains committed to keeping all taxes and elements of the local government finance system under review and will consider options for reform where there is clear evidence that change would deliver better outcomes for residents and councils alike.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether her Department plans to introduce measures to (a) restrict practical driving test bookings to a candidate’s local area and (b) prevent fraudulent activity on third-party platforms offering driving test swaps.
Answered by Simon Lightwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
To ensure fairness for everyone wanting to book a practical driving test, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) continues to work hard to combat the unscrupulous practice of reselling tests across the country.
DVSA is working hard to reduce the average waiting times, using the responses gathered from its public consultation on improving the rules for booking car driving tests. The consultation closed on 23 July. On 12 November, the Secretary of State for Transport, announced the outcome of the consultation to improve car driving test booking rules.
In the coming months, DVSA will:
DVSA encourages learner drivers to only use the official GOV.UK website to book and manage their driving test. DVSA has published advice aimed at learner drivers warning them of the risks of using third party services/apps to book a practical driving test. Further information can be found on GOV.UK at: www.gov.uk/government/news/learner-drivers-warned-about-the-risks-of-driving-test-cancellation-finders.
On 6 January 2025, DVSA introduced new terms and conditions for use of the service driving instructors and trainers use to book and manage practical driving tests for their pupils. Since this change DVSA has issued 275 warnings, 404 suspensions, and closed 894 business accounts.