Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

1802765

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept id	217
answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
hansard heading	Football: Finance
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what discussions she has had with the (a) English Football League and (b) Premier League on the potential impact of the new deal financial package on grassroots football.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52257
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/05/2025 answer text <p>Ministers continue to discuss a distributions deal with the Premier League and EFL on a regular basis, with a clear expectation that any agreement should provide meaningful support across the football pyramid, including grassroots football. While the Football Governance Bill includes a backstop power for the independent regulator to intervene if a deal cannot be reached, this would only apply to distributions between the leagues. As such, Ministers continue to emphasise the importance of a voluntary agreement that delivers broader benefits, including investment in grassroots facilities and programmes.</p> answering member constituency Barnsley South answering member printed Stephanie Peacock question first answered 19/05/2025 14:39:24 answering member 4607 label Biography information for Stephanie Peacock
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802766

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept id	217
answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
hansard heading	Football: Equality
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what discussions she has had with the (a) English Football League and (b) National League on equal opportunity for promotions to the football league for non-league clubs.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52258
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2025 answer text <p>We recognise the strength of feeling within the National League regarding promotion arrangements to the EFL and understand the desire for greater opportunities for clubs to progress through the football pyramid. The competitiveness and sustainability of the league system are important considerations, and we appreciate the views of all stakeholders on this issue.</p><p>While promotion and relegation structures are ultimately a matter for the leagues themselves, we remain engaged with the football authorities on broader discussions about the future of the game.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Barnsley South answering member printed Stephanie Peacock question first answered 21/05/2025 09:52:16 answering member 4607 label Biography information for Stephanie Peacock
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802767

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will assess the potential impact of changes to the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund on the number of applications received to that fund; and if she will publish that assessment.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52259
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2025 answer text <p>The department expects the number of applications to the adoption and special guardianship support fund to continue to increase, in line with previous years. The changes we introduced were designed to maximise the number of children who can get support in this year. Application numbers are collected and assessed on a weekly basis as part of routine management reporting.</p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency Lewisham East answering member printed Janet Daby question first answered 21/05/2025 17:52:36 answering member 4698 label Biography information for Janet Daby
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802768

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many and what proportion of people in receipt of the Personal Independence Payment enhanced daily living component were awarded less than four points in all daily living activities in the most recent period for which data is available.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52260
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 23/05/2025 answer text <p>Data on the number and proportion of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants with an enhanced daily living component who scored less than four points can be found in table 1 below.</p><p>The number of people currently on PIP who did not score 4 points in one category in their last assessment should not be equated with the number who are likely to lose PIP in future. It’s important to make a clear distinction between the two, not least because we don’t want constituents to be unnecessarily fearful about their situation, when we understand many are already anxious. Someone who did not score 4 points in an activity in a previous assessment may well score 4 points in a future assessment as conditions change over time.</p><p>After taking account of behavioural changes, the OBR predicts that 9 in 10 of those on PIP daily living at the point any changes come in will still be receiving PIP by the end of the decade.</p><p>There will be no immediate changes to PIP eligibility. Our intention is that changes will start to come into effect from November 2026 for PIP, subject to parliamentary approval.</p><p>After that date, no one will lose PIP without first being reassessed by a trained assessor or healthcare professional, who assesses individual needs and circumstance. Reassessments happen on average every 3 years.</p><p>We are consulting on how best to support those who are affected by the new eligibility changes, including ensuring health and care needs are met.</p><p>We have also announced a wider review of the PIP assessment to make it fair and fit for purpose, which I will lead. We are bringing together a range of experts, stakeholders and people with lived experience to consider how best to do this. We will provide further details as plans progress.</p><p>Even with these reforms, the overall number of people on PIP and DLA is expected to rise by 750,000 by the end of this parliament and spending will rise from £23bn in 24/25 to £31bn in 29/30.</p><p><strong>Table 1: volume and percentage of PIP claimants receiving an enhanced daily living award, who scored less than four points in all daily living activities</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Daily Living Award</p></td><td><p>Volume of PIP claimants who scored &lt; 4 points</p></td><td><p>Percentage of PIP claimants who scored &lt; 4 points</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Enhanced</p></td><td><p>203,000</p></td><td><p>13%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><strong>Source(s):</strong> PIP Administrative Data</p><p><strong>Notes:</strong></p><ul><li>Figures are for England and Wales only.</li><li>Figures are for January 2025 caseload.</li><li>Figures only include New Claims.</li><li>Figures include normal claims and exclude claims under Special Rules for End of Life (SREL).</li><li>Figures are for working aged claimants only.</li><li>Figures have been rounded to the nearest 1000.</li><li>Percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number.</li></ul> answering member constituency East Ham answering member printed Sir Stephen Timms question first answered 23/05/2025 13:35:21 answering member 163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802769

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Work and Pensions
answering dept id	29
answering dept short name	Work and Pensions
answering dept sort name	Work and Pensions
hansard heading	Personal Independence Payment: North Yorkshire
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many and what proportion of people in receipt of the Personal Independence Payment enhanced daily living component were awarded less than four points in all daily living activities in (a) York Central constituency, (b) City of York Local Authority area and (c) York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority area in the most recent period for which data is available.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52261
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 29/05/2025 answer text <p>Information on the impacts of the Pathways to Work Green Paper has been published here ‘<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pathways-to-work-reforming-benefits-and-support-to-get-britain-working-green-paper" target="_blank">Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper’(opens in a new tab)</a>, including an Evidence Pack which contains the maximum points scored on any Daily Living activity by Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants, broken down by Parliamentary Constituency and Local Authority. For York Central constituency, 42% of people scored fewer than 4 points at last assessment.</p><p> </p><p>As the information is not published in the way you have requested, information on the volume and proportion of PIP claimants who received a standard Daily Living award rate and scored less than four points in all daily living activities, by different geographical breakdowns can be found in Table 1 below. This should not be equated with the number who are likely to lose PIP. It’s important to make a clear distinction between the two, not least because we don’t want constituents to be unnecessarily fearful about their situation, when we understand many are already anxious.</p><p> </p><p>No one will lose access to PIP immediately. The changes, subject to parliamentary approval, would be brought in from November 2026. After that date, no one will lose PIP without first being reassessed by a trained assessor or healthcare professional, who assesses individual needs and circumstance. Reassessments happen on average every 3 years. Someone who didn’t score 4 points in an activity in a previous assessment may well score 4 points in a future assessment – not least as many conditions tend to get worse, not better, over time.</p><p> </p><p>After taking account of behavioural changes, OBR predicts that 370,000 people who will be receiving PIP at the point of implementation of the four point requirement in November 2026, will have lost their PIP Daily Living entitlement by 2029/30. Of all PIP recipients at the point of implementation, 9 in 10 will not lose PIP during the subsequent 3 years from this change. If the OBR’s behavioural assumptions for England and Wales were applicable to York and North Yorkshire, around one-fifth of current claimants shown in table 1 would no longer receive their daily living component following review.</p><p> </p><p>We are consulting on how best to support those who are affected by the new eligibility changes, including how to make sure health and eligible care needs are met. PIP is not based on condition diagnosis but on functional disability as the result of one or more conditions, and is awarded as a contribution to the additional costs which result.</p><p> </p><p>We also intend to launch a wider review of the PIP assessment which I will lead, and we will bring together a range of experts, stakeholders and people with lived experience to consider how best to do this and to start the process as part of preparing for a review. We will provide further details as plans progress.</p><p> </p><p>Even with these reforms, the overall number of people on PIP and DLA is expected to rise by 750,000 by the end of this parliament and spending will rise from £23bn in 24/25 to £31bn in 29/30.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Table 1: volume and percentage of PIP claimants who are in receipt of the daily living award rate and scored less than four points in all daily living activities by different geographical breakdowns</strong></p><table><tbody><tr><td rowspan="2"><p>Geographical breakdowns</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Standard Daily Living</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Enhanced Daily Living</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Volume of claimants who scored &lt;4 points</p></td><td><p>Percentage of claimants who scored &lt;4 points</p></td><td><p>Volume of claimants who scored &lt;4 points</p></td><td><p>Percentage of claimants who scored &lt;4 points</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>York Central Parliamentary Constituency</p></td><td><p>1,400</p></td><td><p>83%</p></td><td><p>300</p></td><td><p>12%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>City of York Local Authority</p></td><td><p>2,200</p></td><td><p>83%</p></td><td><p>400</p></td><td><p>11%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>York and North Yorkshire Combined Authority</p></td><td><p>10,700</p></td><td><p>85%</p></td><td><p>1,800</p></td><td><p>11%</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>England and Wales</p></td><td><p>1,121,100</p></td><td><p>87%</p></td><td><p>203,000</p></td><td><p>13%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><strong>Notes:</strong></p><ul><li>Data is for January 2025 caseload.</li><li>Volumes are rounded to the nearest 100.</li><li>Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole percentage.</li><li>Data includes working aged claimants only.</li><li>Data includes normal rules claimants only, and excludes special rules for end of life (SREL) claimants as they typically receive maximum or very high scores.</li><li>Claimants with missing point scores have been excluded from the data.</li></ul><p><strong> </strong></p> answering member constituency East Ham answering member printed Sir Stephen Timms question first answered 29/05/2025 12:34:34 answering member 163 label Biography information for Sir Stephen Timms
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802770

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Ministry of Defence
answering dept id	11
answering dept short name	Defence
answering dept sort name	Defence
hansard heading	Defence: Fire Prevention
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what assessment he has made of the value for money of the Defence Fire and Risk Project.
tabling member constituency	York Central
tabling member printed	Rachael Maskell
uin	52262
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/05/2025 answer text <p>A comprehensive review of the contract was undertaken in autumn 2023 in accordance with Cabinet Office requirements, which found that as a whole, the Defence Fire and Risk Project contract represented satisfactory Value for Money. No further assessment has yet been made by this government.</p> answering member constituency Plymouth Sutton and Devonport answering member printed Luke Pollard question first answered 22/05/2025 11:09:33 answering member 4682 label Biography information for Luke Pollard
tabling member	4471 label Biography information for Rachael Maskell

1802771

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept id	217
answering dept short name	Culture, Media and Sport
answering dept sort name	Culture, Media and Sport
hansard heading	Meta: Artificial Intelligence
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what recent discussions she has had with Meta on generative artificial intelligence models.
tabling member constituency	Slough
tabling member printed	Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi
uin	52301
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/05/2025 answer text <p>Ministers from DCMS and DSIT have convened a series of roundtables with the tech sector and the cultural and creative industries regarding our consultation on Copyright and AI. All ministerial meetings are published quarterly.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Rhondda and Ogmore answering member printed Chris Bryant question first answered 22/05/2025 13:20:30 answering member 1446 label Biography information for Sir Chris Bryant
tabling member	4638 label Biography information for Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi

1802773

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Department for Education
answering dept id	60
answering dept short name	Education
answering dept sort name	Education
hansard heading	Special Educational Needs: Home Education
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what steps she plans to take to enable parents who need to withdraw their child from school when SEND support is insufficient to do so.
tabling member constituency	Cheadle
tabling member printed	Tom Morrison
uin	52375
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 22/05/2025 answer text <p>Parents have a right to educate a child of compulsory school age otherwise than at school, provided that the education is suitable. Home education can be demanding and so should only ever be an informed and positive choice. If their child is in a mainstream school, parents can withdraw their child by notifying the school that they wish to home educate. If their child is in a special school under arrangements made by a local authority, then the parent must first seek local authority consent. This additional check is not intended to keep children in a setting that does not meet their needs, but rather to ensure that there are no educational suitability issues resulting from the loss of the support at the school.</p><p>If parents have concerns that their child’s special educational needs (SEN) are not being met in school, then they should discuss these concerns with the school. If their child has an education, health and care plan, then they should also talk to their local authority. In either case, the package of support may need to be reviewed.</p><p>The department is aware of the challenges in the special educational needs and disabilities SEND system, and the government has been clear that a more inclusive education system is needed to give children and young people the opportunities they need to achieve and thrive.</p> answering member constituency Newcastle upon Tyne North answering member printed Catherine McKinnell question first answered 22/05/2025 15:25:33 answering member 4125 label Biography information for Catherine McKinnell
tabling member	5090

1802775

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
answering dept id	7
answering dept short name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
answering dept sort name	Housing, Communities and Local Government
hansard heading	Buildings Safety Regulator
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment she has made of the reasons for the time taken to process applications to the Building Safety Regulator.
tabling member constituency	Thirsk and Malton
tabling member printed	Kevin Hollinrake
uin	52264
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2025 answer text <p>The MHCLG and the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) both recognise the impact of Gateway delays on the construction pipeline of high-rise projects and are taking action to address the current challenges.</p><p> </p><p>The Department are working closely with the BSR to improve processing times and have already taken several actions. As a new function BSR has needed to refine and improve its processes. We have provided funding to the BSR to recruit an extra 30 frontline staff to bolster its capacity. On 14 May, BSR also launched a campaign to directly recruit Registered Building Inspectors (RBIs), with further recruitment planned in June 2025. BSR is carrying out extensive stakeholder engagement to support applicants to better understand and meet the new requirements. BSR also issued new guidance in March 2025 based on the findings of research with organisations submitting building control applications. MHCLG and BSR are also reviewing better ways to access specialist advice on multi-disciplinary teams (MDTs) which assess applications to enable faster assessment times.</p><p> </p><p>Whilst BSR and MHCLG are exploring all possible opportunities to strengthen the new Gateway process and guidance to industry, it is important to recognise that a significant volume of applications continue to be invalidated or rejected for not meeting the legislative requirements. These are buildings that, had they been constructed, might have placed residents at risk and/or living in housing that did not meet long-standing requirements. It is also important to note that additional information requests for missing details in applications can add between at least 4-6 weeks onto the process.</p><p> </p><p>MHCLG are exploring all possible options with the BSR to ensure it is equipped for the high-demand of applications without compromising on quality assurance. In rejecting applications which are not up to standard, the BSR is ensuring the safety of future residents. Ministers continue to monitor the situation closely.</p> answering member constituency Nottingham North and Kimberley answering member printed Alex Norris question first answered 21/05/2025 15:13:27 answering member 4641 label Biography information for Alex Norris
tabling member	4474 label Biography information for Kevin Hollinrake

1802776

registered interest
date	14/05/2025
answering body	Ministry of Justice
answering dept id	54
answering dept short name	Justice
answering dept sort name	Justice
hansard heading	Repossession Orders: Private Rented Housing
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what statistics (a) her Department and (b) His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service collates on court waiting times for private rented sector repossession claims.
tabling member constituency	Thirsk and Malton
tabling member printed	Kevin Hollinrake
uin	52265
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 21/05/2025 answer text <p>The Ministry of Justice publishes data on timeliness for private landlord claims. The latest data for the quarter January to March 2025 was published on 15 May 2025. This data is available in table 6 which can be found:</p><p><a href="https://view.officeapps.live.com/op/view.aspx?src=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fmedia%2F68248ac67293a87b6c75ec0a%2FMortgage_and_Landlord_Possession_Tables_Q1_Jan_to_Mar_2025.ods&amp;wdOrigin=BROWSELINK" target="_blank">Mortgage_and_Landlord_Possession_Tables_Q1_Jan_to_Mar_2025.ods.</a></p><p>The possession type can be filtered to private landlord in the dropdown above the table.</p> answering member constituency Finchley and Golders Green answering member printed Sarah Sackman question first answered 21/05/2025 08:43:15 answering member 5204
tabling member	4474 label Biography information for Kevin Hollinrake