Asked by: Greg Smith (Conservative - Mid Buckinghamshire)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of her policy of no reduced rate or exemption for children or family travelling in premium economy of Air Passenger Duty on families travelling with children in premium economy cabins on long haul flights; and how the UK’s approach compares with aviation passenger tax regimes in other European countries.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
Air Passenger Duty (APD) applies to airlines, not individual passengers, and is the principal tax on the aviation sector. It is expected to raise £4.7 billion in 2025-26 and it aims to ensure that airlines make a fair contribution to the public finances, particularly given that tickets are VAT free and aviation fuel incurs no duty. The distance-based band structure ensures that those who travel furthest, and in the greatest comfort, incur a greater tax liability. Other countries also have different forms of aviation taxes.
Children under 16 years old on the date of the flight, and in the lowest class of travel, are exempt from APD. If children under 16 years old are travelling in any other class (such as premium economy) or in business jets, they are not exempt. Children under 2 years old without a seat are exempt from Air Passenger Duty for all classes of travel.
Asked by: Graham Stuart (Conservative - Beverley and Holderness)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of excluding soft play centres and other family focused venues from the 15 per cent business rates discount for pubs and music venues on those businesses; and whether she plans to extend equivalent relief to venues serving children, parents and carers.
Answered by Dan Tomlinson - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
Pubs rents in business rates valuations are analysed differently to some other sectors. While most hospitality and leisure properties are valued by comparing the size of the property, pubs are valued by comparing their turnover potential. Industry bodies have highlighted concerns with how costs are accounted for in this methodology, particularly during periods of high inflation. There is significant overlap between the pub sector and live music venues, with many pubs serving as grassroots live music venues, meaning they are often valued for business rates purposes in a similar way.
The new pubs and live music venues relief is on top of the £4.3 billion support package announced at the Budget to support ratepayers across all sectors seeing bill increases. As a result of the Budget package, over half of ratepayers will see no bill increases. This also means most properties seeing increases will see them capped at 15% or less next year, or £800 for the smallest.
The Government is also introducing new permanently lower tax rates for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure (RHL) properties, including soft play centres. These new tax rates are worth nearly £1 billion per year, and will benefit over 750,000 properties.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the psychological impact of contact arrangements on children is considered in cases involving domestic abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether recommendations arising from the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s 2025 report will inform the handling of domestic abuse cases within the family justice system.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment has been made of the potential contribution of family court processes, including repeated proceedings and contact litigation, to ongoing harm for victims of domestic abuse and their children.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps are being taken to help ensure that family court procedures prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour following relationship breakdown.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises the impact that family court proceedings have on children and adult survivors of domestic abuse, which is why we are prioritising strong safeguarding and specialist support for those navigating the system.
The Government acknowledges that repeated court hearings can retraumatise adult and child victims of domestic abuse. The Pathfinder pilot was launched in Dorset and North Wales in February 2022 and has now been expanded to 10 court areas in England and Wales, which accounts for around a quarter of private law proceedings in England and Wales. Further expansion will be announced in due course. The Pathfinder model improves coordination between the family court and agencies, including local authorities and the police, particularly in cases involving domestic abuse. This approach reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.
By introducing a Child Impact Report early in the process and having a more investigative process, judges are enabled to assess risks thoroughly and make more sustainable orders. This child-centred, trauma-informed approach improves early risk identification, strengthens multiagency collaboration, and helps ensure that children’s voices are heard and that the psychological impact of contact arrangements is fully considered by the court.
This Government has taken steps to ensure that family court procedures more effectively identify and prevent patterns of coercive or controlling behaviour. Practice Direction 12 J has been amended to require courts to assess patterns of behaviour rather than isolated incidents, to modernise terminology, and to strengthen safeguards for vulnerable parties. Alongside this, section 91(14) orders, also referred to as “barring orders”, may be issued by the family court where further applications would put a child or adult, such as a victim of domestic abuse, at risk of harm, particularly where proceedings could be a form of continuing domestic abuse. Courts can issue a s91(14) order of their own motion or on application. Where such an order is in place, the court is required to consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission to make a new application.
The Government welcomes the publication of the Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s report “Everyday Business: Addressing domestic abuse and continuing harm through a family court review and reporting mechanism.” We are carefully considering the recommendations made in the report and will publish a full response shortly.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what recent assessment he has made of the potential impact of free trade agreements on family businesses in Surrey.
Answered by Chris Bryant - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
We do not assess the direct effects of individual Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) on specific types of businesses within specific counties, nor do we monitor the way they are utilised in such granular detail.
However, we do publish assessments of the potential economic, sectoral, distributional and environmental impacts of our FTAs on GOV.UK. As these set out, FTAs have an important role to play in delivering economic growth in all sectors and all regions. Through FTAs, businesses can benefit from tariff reductions, improved market access, and enhanced protections in investment and digital trade.
The department is working hand-in-hand with UK businesses to ensure firms have the tools and knowledge they need to seize these opportunities.
Asked by: Mark Sewards (Labour - Leeds South West and Morley)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with representatives of the Falkland Islands on the potential impact of trade tariffs on its economy.
Answered by Stephen Doughty - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We are proud of the bond that the United Kingdom shares with the Falkland Islands as part of one Great British family, and we deeply value the relationship between our governments.
I was pleased to speak with the new Assembly within a week of their election, and my officials have been engaging with the new representatives on their priorities, one of which is obviously trade.
It is a matter of fact that the Brexit deal reached by the party opposite excluded the Overseas Territories, and we recognise the challenges EU trade tariffs pose for the Falkland Islands economy. But we are working with the Department for Business and Trade to promote Falklands trade in the UK and other markets.
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether her Department has asked the Solicitors Regulation Authority to meet representatives of former clients of McClure Solicitors who have requested direct engagement with the regulator.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government recognises the financial loss, distress and uncertainty experienced by former clients affected by the collapse of WW&J McClure Ltd (McClure), particularly in relation to family protection trusts and wider estate planning arrangements.
The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. Responsibility for regulating the sector sits with approved regulators, overseen by the Legal Services Board (LSB). The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. This includes McClure, as well as Jones Whyte which took on the work in progress and certain assets of McClure when it went into administration in April 2021. The SRA regulates the firms’ activities in England and Wales, with matters relating to their Scottish offices falling under the Law Society of Scotland. Details of the SRA’s ongoing work in relation to McClure is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/news/news/mcclure/.
With regards to asking the SRA to meet representatives of former clients of McClure, given regulatory independence, the Ministry of Justice does not direct the SRA’s stakeholder engagement. However, I have discussed the impact of the firm’s collapse with the SRA and know that the SRA is continuing to meet with various stakeholders, including those representing former clients.
Any warning signs relating to McClure prior to the firm’s collapse, and when these were identified by legal services regulators, are similarly operational matters for the independent SRA. The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information.
In relation to successor firm requirements, SRA guidance for firms is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/closing-down-your-practice/. Under the SRA’s framework, its assessment is that Jones Whyte is not a successor practice. However, the firm must make sure it complies with a range of obligations, including those which have been set out in a compliance plan which the firm has agreed and on which the SRA is monitoring progress. This includes secure handling and storage of client papers and documents, and appropriate arrangements for file distribution and advice to impacted clients on their options.
With regard to changes to legal services regulation since the collapse of McClure, there has been continued work to strengthen how risks to consumers are identified and addressed. The SRA’s Corporate Strategy 2023-26 includes strengthening risk based and proactive regulation as a strategic priority and it has pursued action in this area. For example, in its recent Business Plan, the SRA sets out the steps it has taken to improve how it uses data and intelligence to spot risks more swiftly and take action to manage them effectively. The SRA has also indicated that it is accelerating this work, including through further investment in people and technology. In addition, the SRA is implementing changes in response to the LSB’s independent reviews of its regulation of Axiom Ince Ltd and SSB Group Ltd.
The Ministry of Justice keeps the statutory framework set by the Legal Services Act 2007 under review to ensure that it is operating effectively and protects consumers. The Government has no current plans to review the regulation of estate planning and trust-selling practices. The Department's focus is on improving the enforcement of existing rules.
Asked by: Martin Wrigley (Liberal Democrat - Newton Abbot)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether changes have been made to legal services regulation since the collapse of McClure Solicitors to ensure that widespread consumer detriment is identified and addressed at an earlier stage.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government recognises the financial loss, distress and uncertainty experienced by former clients affected by the collapse of WW&J McClure Ltd (McClure), particularly in relation to family protection trusts and wider estate planning arrangements.
The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of government. Responsibility for regulating the sector sits with approved regulators, overseen by the Legal Services Board (LSB). The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and most law firms in England and Wales. This includes McClure, as well as Jones Whyte which took on the work in progress and certain assets of McClure when it went into administration in April 2021. The SRA regulates the firms’ activities in England and Wales, with matters relating to their Scottish offices falling under the Law Society of Scotland. Details of the SRA’s ongoing work in relation to McClure is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/news/news/mcclure/.
With regards to asking the SRA to meet representatives of former clients of McClure, given regulatory independence, the Ministry of Justice does not direct the SRA’s stakeholder engagement. However, I have discussed the impact of the firm’s collapse with the SRA and know that the SRA is continuing to meet with various stakeholders, including those representing former clients.
Any warning signs relating to McClure prior to the firm’s collapse, and when these were identified by legal services regulators, are similarly operational matters for the independent SRA. The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information.
In relation to successor firm requirements, SRA guidance for firms is available here: https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/guidance/closing-down-your-practice/. Under the SRA’s framework, its assessment is that Jones Whyte is not a successor practice. However, the firm must make sure it complies with a range of obligations, including those which have been set out in a compliance plan which the firm has agreed and on which the SRA is monitoring progress. This includes secure handling and storage of client papers and documents, and appropriate arrangements for file distribution and advice to impacted clients on their options.
With regard to changes to legal services regulation since the collapse of McClure, there has been continued work to strengthen how risks to consumers are identified and addressed. The SRA’s Corporate Strategy 2023-26 includes strengthening risk based and proactive regulation as a strategic priority and it has pursued action in this area. For example, in its recent Business Plan, the SRA sets out the steps it has taken to improve how it uses data and intelligence to spot risks more swiftly and take action to manage them effectively. The SRA has also indicated that it is accelerating this work, including through further investment in people and technology. In addition, the SRA is implementing changes in response to the LSB’s independent reviews of its regulation of Axiom Ince Ltd and SSB Group Ltd.
The Ministry of Justice keeps the statutory framework set by the Legal Services Act 2007 under review to ensure that it is operating effectively and protects consumers. The Government has no current plans to review the regulation of estate planning and trust-selling practices. The Department's focus is on improving the enforcement of existing rules.