Written questions by McDonald.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of consecutive disclaimed audit opinions for Tees Valley Combined Authority accounts and the improvement requirements of the Best Value Notice process.

Audit opinions and compliance with the statutory audit requirements are an important part of the Department’s holistic assessment of a local authority’s delivery of Best Value. The Best Value Notice issued to Tees Valley Combined Authority sets clear expectations for the authority to comply with its external auditor’s recommendations, including delivering sustained improvement in financial governance, capacity and use of resources.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the governance arrangements between Tees Valley Combined Authority and South Tees Development Corporation, under the Best Value Notice process.

Governance and finance arrangements are considered as part of the Department’s holistic assessment of a local authority’s delivery of Best Value, as set out in the statutory guidance on Best Value standards and intervention. We set out clearly that the Best Value Notice for Tees Valley Combined Authority will be reviewed after 12 months. Any decisions on the Notice will be based on a holistic judgement of all available information, including considered engagement with the authority about progress against its improvement plan.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of loan documentation between Tees Valley Combined Authority and South Tees Development Corporation.

Governance and finance arrangements are considered as part of the Department’s holistic assessment of a local authority’s delivery of Best Value, as set out in the statutory guidance on Best Value standards and intervention. We set out clearly that the Best Value Notice for Tees Valley Combined Authority will be reviewed after 12 months. Any decisions on the Notice will be based on a holistic judgement of all available information, including considered engagement with the authority about progress against its improvement plan.

Communities and Local Government, what information his Department holds on the advice the Independent Advisory Board has provided on managing conflicts between borrowing and lending functions to a) Tees Valley Combined Authority and b) South Tees Development Corporation.

The Tees Valley Combined Authority’s improvement board is independent and appointed by the authority. As part of the Best Value Notice, the Department engages regularly with the Board for updates and broader assurance that the necessary progress is being made. The Board also reports publicly on its findings to the combined authority’s Cabinet.

Communities and Local Government, if the Department will consult a) constituent local authorities, and b) local Members of Parliament regarding the performance of Tees Valley Combined Authority, in relation to its Best Value Notice process.

Through the Best Value Notice process, the Department has engaged extensively with the combined authority, its constituent authorities, government departments, the Independent Advisory Board and the external auditor to understand views and track progress against the Notice. The evidence provided by key local and national stakeholders remain a crucial part of the Best Value Notice process.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment he has made regarding the potential implications for his policies of revenue-backed lending arrangements for Best Value assessments.

Finance arrangements are considered as part of the Department’s holistic assessment of a local authority’s delivery of Best Value, as set out in the statutory guidance on Best Value standards and intervention. In making borrowing decisions, authorities must comply with legislation and have regard to statutory guidance to ensure that all borrowing is prudent, affordable and sustainable, and in compliance with their Best Value Duty. Under the current system, local authorities have wide freedoms to borrow and invest as they are best placed to determine their own capital strategies to meet the needs of local residents. Under statute, all borrowing is secured indifferently on the authority's revenues.

Communities and Local Government, what steps he is taking to reduce (a) the duration of stays in temporary accommodation and (b) the use of out-of-area placements for households from Middlesbrough and Thornaby East.

The Government publishes quarterly homelessness statistics which is available on gov.uk here. We must build more homes in the areas where they are needed so we can reduce the need for out of area placements and reduce the number of people in temporary accommodation, which is why we will deliver the biggest increase to social and affordable housing in a generation. We have also increased funding for homelessness services by £316 million to a total of more than £1 billion in 2025/26 to support local authorities to deliver homelessness services. This includes a £10.9 million top up announced last month to support households in the worst forms of temporary accommodation, such as bed & breakfast or out of area accommodation. We are publishing a cross-Government homelessness strategy later this year that will get us back on track to ending homelessness.

Communities and Local Government, how many households owed a homelessness duty by (a) Middlesbrough Council and (b) Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council were placed in temporary accommodation (i) within the local authority area, (ii) elsewhere in the Tees Valley Combined Authority area and (iii) outside that area in each of the last three years; and what information his Department holds on the distance from the placing authority area in such cases.

The Government publishes quarterly homelessness statistics which is available on gov.uk here. We must build more homes in the areas where they are needed so we can reduce the need for out of area placements and reduce the number of people in temporary accommodation, which is why we will deliver the biggest increase to social and affordable housing in a generation. We have also increased funding for homelessness services by £316 million to a total of more than £1 billion in 2025/26 to support local authorities to deliver homelessness services. This includes a £10.9 million top up announced last month to support households in the worst forms of temporary accommodation, such as bed & breakfast or out of area accommodation. We are publishing a cross-Government homelessness strategy later this year that will get us back on track to ending homelessness.

Communities and Local Government, how many households are living in temporary accommodation (a) in England, (b) in Middlesbrough local authority area and (c) in Stockton-on-Tees local authority area; and what the i) average and ii) median lengths of stay in temporary accommodation are in each of those areas.

The Government publishes quarterly homelessness statistics which is available on gov.uk here. We must build more homes in the areas where they are needed so we can reduce the need for out of area placements and reduce the number of people in temporary accommodation, which is why we will deliver the biggest increase to social and affordable housing in a generation. We have also increased funding for homelessness services by £316 million to a total of more than £1 billion in 2025/26 to support local authorities to deliver homelessness services. This includes a £10.9 million top up announced last month to support households in the worst forms of temporary accommodation, such as bed & breakfast or out of area accommodation. We are publishing a cross-Government homelessness strategy later this year that will get us back on track to ending homelessness.

Communities and Local Government, whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of including housing costs in the Indices of Multiple Deprivation on benefit areas with higher housing values.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government published the English Indices of Deprivation 2025 (IoD25) on Thursday 30th October 2025. All resources can be accessed online here - English indices of deprivation 2025 - GOV.UK As part of the IoD25 release, the Department updated its measures of deprivation in line with recommendations from its 2022 user consultation - Indices Futures: Updating the English Indices of Deprivation (IoD) - consultation - GOV.UK - and broader stakeholder engagement. This includes accounting for housing costs within specific domains. Full detail on the Indices methodology can be found in the IoD25 Technical Report online here - English indices of deprivation 2025: technical report - GOV.UK. Further analysis and interpretation of the data is available in our Research Report online here - English indices of deprivation 2025: research report - GOV.UK.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of including housing costs in the Indices of Multiple Deprivation on areas with lower housing costs but higher levels of deprivation.

The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government published the English Indices of Deprivation 2025 (IoD25) on Thursday 30th October 2025. All resources can be accessed online here - English indices of deprivation 2025 - GOV.UK As part of the IoD25 release, the Department updated its measures of deprivation in line with recommendations from its 2022 user consultation - Indices Futures: Updating the English Indices of Deprivation (IoD) - consultation - GOV.UK - and broader stakeholder engagement. This includes accounting for housing costs within specific domains. Full detail on the Indices methodology can be found in the IoD25 Technical Report online here - English indices of deprivation 2025: technical report - GOV.UK. Further analysis and interpretation of the data is available in our Research Report online here - English indices of deprivation 2025: research report - GOV.UK.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to the Written Ministerial Statement of 3 April 2025 entitled Local Government Best Value, HCWS576, whether her Department has taken recent steps to issue guidance to other Departments on strengthening assurance requirements for (a) new and (b) ongoing funding for the Tees Valley Combined Authority.

Under the department’s stewardship and the Best Value Notice issued on 3 April, Tees Valley Combined Authority is leading its own improvement efforts and working with local partners to build on the progress made following the independent Tees Valley Review. It remains the responsibility of relevant ministers and Senior Responsible Owners overseeing a grant programme to ensure they have sufficient assurance and performance management arrangements that an authority has the capacity and capability to deliver a programme effectively.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to the Written Ministerial Statement of 3 April 2025 entitled Local Government Best Value, HCWS576, whether her Department's quarterly engagement with the Tees Valley Combined Authority includes consideration of the management of the Transport for City Regions funding allocation.

While individual funding programmes are managed and assured independently by their respective departments, an ongoing assessment of the authority's progress against the best value notice will be based on a holistic judgement of all available information and considered engagement with the authority

Communities and Local Government, what discussions she has had with each Freeport Governing Body on their engagement with local security stakeholders.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, if she will publish the dates on which the Freeports Security Forum met in the last 12 months.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, if she will make it her policy to publish the attendees at each Freeports Security Forum meeting.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment she has made of the capacity of freeport governing bodies to conduct annual security audits.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, whether the Freeports Security Forum has provided any recommendations to local Freeports to strengthen their local security apparatus.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, if she will publish (a) the date on which each Freeport's Annual Freeport Security Audit was received and (b) the Freeport Security Forum's assessment of each of those audits.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.

Communities and Local Government, whether her Department has made an assessment of the potential merits of (a) withholding and (b) removing access to Freeport policy benefits where there has been continued (i) non-compliance and (ii) non-delivery without an adequate reason.

Freeport areas are subject to the same laws and regulations safeguarding security as the rest of the UK. A Freeport customs site is a secure, enclosed zone within the wider Freeport geography. All Freeport customs sites are required to obtain AEO(S) or equivalent authorisation from HMRC, an international gold standard for safety and security, and remain subject to robust ongoing oversight from HMRC. In addition to this, Freeports are required to put in place arrangements for overseeing relevant security arrangements across their geographies, to ensure effective coordination between relevant bodies and provisions. Given Freeports are subject to the same security regime as the rest of the UK, the purpose of these arrangements is coordination, not duplication. In Spring 2024, these coordination arrangements in all English Freeports were audited by the Freeports Security Forum and recommendations were provided to relevant Freeports, to assist them in achieving best practice on security. The government departments represented on the Freeports Security Forum include Home Office, Border Force, HMRC, the Department for Transport, HMT, the National Crime Agency and Police. There are no plans to publish individual names of attendees on the Security Forum. On 5 March 2025, the government decided not to conduct a further security audit as no new security risks associated with Freeport status, requiring further mitigation above and beyond the application of UK-wide security laws and regulations, had been identified. Risks associated with customs sites continue to be managed directly by central government through HMRC’s robust oversight arrangements. Freeports must share information on local arrangements for coordinating security activity with government upon request and the government reserves the right to audit these as required.