Committee publication · Correspondence · 21 May 2026

Correspondence from the Chair to the Department for Education, relating to Written Parliamentary Questions performance, dated 7 April 2026 and the reply, dated 7 May 2026

Inquiry: Written Parliamentary Questions: Departmental performance in Session 2024-26

Summary

The Procedure Committee Chair wrote to the Department for Education on 7 April 2026 expressing concern about the DfE's deteriorating performance in answering Written Parliamentary Questions. Performance fell from 82% on named day questions in the first session period to 49% by November 2025, and from 90% on ordinary questions to 64%, despite other departments managing similar or larger increases in question volumes. The Secretary of State replied on 7 May acknowledging the poor performance, citing a far-reaching policy agenda and volume increases, and committing to remedial action and ministerial evidence before the Committee.

Key findings

DfE performance on named day questions collapsed from 82% (July–December 2024) to 49% (December 2024–November 2025), and ordinary questions fell from 90% to 64%, both falling well short of the 85% standard
DfE received an 89% increase in WPQ volume per sitting day in 2024–26 compared to 2023–24, but other departments with similar or larger increases have maintained better performance
The Secretary of State attributed performance decline to a concentrated legislative reform agenda and the resonance of government reforms with organisations, families, and individuals
DfE committed to reviewing internal systems, automation opportunities, streamlining clearance processes, and proactive communication, with a minister to appear before the Committee with detailed remedial actions

Government position

The Department for Education acknowledges poor performance and non-compliance with the 85% standard. It does not dispute the figures or comparative performance but explains the deterioration through increased policy volume and reform activity. The government accepts the need for remedial action and commits to systemic review, process streamlining, and ministerial evidence to the Committee, demonstrating partial acceptance of the Committee's concerns paired with contextual justification.

Tone

Critical

Topics

parliamentary-accountabilitygovernment-administrationeducation-policy

Key actors

Cat Smith MP, Bridget Phillipson MP, Helen Hayes MP, Department for Education, Procedure Committee, House of Commons

Notable line

“DfE's performance fell to 49% of named day responses on time, and 64% of ordinary responses within 5 days.”

Key Quotes

“… we were struck by the deteriorating performance of your department”
— Cat Smith MP · expressing concern about DfE's WPQ performance

“… many other departments have also seen a similar – indeed, some have even seen a larger – increase, but have not seen their performance deteriorate to the same degree”
— Cat Smith MP · comparing DfE's response to volume increases against other departments

“Both I and the department take parliamentary scrutiny seriously. We recognise the vital role of Parliament in holding the government to account and the importance of timely responses”
— Bridget Phillipson MP · opening response acknowledging parliamentary role

“We are leading a legislative agenda for extensive reform in areas which have not been addressed for many years”
— Bridget Phillipson MP · explaining drivers of increased WPQ volume

“We recognise that our performance during this Session has not met the expected standard. We are not complacent.”
— Bridget Phillipson MP · acknowledging performance failure and commitment to improvement

View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗