Written questions by Obese-Jecty.

What assessment has he made of the surety of heating oil supply for October 2026 onwards.

The Government keeps the security of heating oil supply under close and continuous review. The UK benefits from strong and diverse security of fuel supplies, including heating oil. While heating oil markets can experience periods of operational pressure, supply continues to be available through established domestic and international supply routes. The Government works closely with the sector to monitor supply, demand and delivery conditions and will continue to monitor the position closely as the heating season approaches.

Pursuant to the Answer of 20 April 2026 to Auestion 125323 on Ahmed al-Sharaa, whether she discussed the repatriation of ISIS-linked individuals from the Al-Roj camp in Syria with the (a) President of Syria, (b) Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates and (c) Director of the General Intelligence Service on 31 March 2026.

The details of conversations between the Home Secretary and senior international partners on matters of national security are confidential and not for release.Minister Falconer made a written ministerial statement to the house on 28 January on the situation in North-East Syria and has committed to providing further updates to the House in due course as the situation evolves.’

Pursuant to the Answer of 20 April 2026 to Question 125514 on Armed Forces: Housing, for what reason has the number of void service family properties in Huntingdon constituency increased from 19 to 99 since May 2025.

The figure of 19 void properties in May 2025 given in the Answer of 20 April 2026 to Question 125514 referred to void properties in the hon. Member's constituency which had been reacquired from Annington and that were not suitable for occupation; it did not reflect the total number of void properties. As of 1 May 2025, there were a total of 108 void Service Family Accommodation (SFA) properties in the Huntingdon constituency. As of 22 April 2026, there are a total of 98 void SFA properties in the Huntingdon constituency.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, on what date did Lord Mandelson receive STRAP level access.

I refer the Hon Member to the statement made by the Prime Minister on 21 April, and his answers to the questions raised in response, including his commitment that the Government would continue to comply with the instructions of Parliament in the Humble Address of 4 February.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, on what date did Lord Mandelson (a) submit his application for STRAP clearance and (b) receive that clearance.

I refer the Hon Member to the statement made by the Prime Minister on 21 April, and his answers to the questions raised in response, including his commitment that the Government would continue to comply with the instructions of Parliament in the Humble Address of 4 February.

With reference to the Policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress has he made in replacing the use of animals in botulinum toxin batch potency testing.

In line with the Government’s strategy to replace animals in science, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) supports the use of non-animal approaches where they are fit for purpose and accepts that, where a biological product is not pharmacologically active in animals and no relevant animal model exists, studies in animals, including with surrogate molecules, should not be undertaken and first-in-human applications can be supported using non-animal data, such as in vitro methods and computer modelling, to inform expected human exposure and safety. Further information is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methodsMore broadly, alternative methods used to characterise safety must be demonstrated as fit for their intended purpose, and MHRA guidance, published in March 2026, sets out its current approach to medicines using non-animal methods, including how such approaches can support regulatory submissions and the adoption of validated alternatives as they become available. For potency testing and for adventitious agent testing, separate information for manufacturers on controls for batch release is on the MHRA website explaining how adoption of non-animal methods for these purposes is supported. Further information is available at the following two links:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mhra-approach-to-medicines-using-non-animal-methodshttps://nibsc.org/about_us/our_use_of_animals.aspx

How many animals have died during UK preclinical testing for Botox (Botulinum toxin) used in aesthetic applications each year since 2005.

The Home Office does not collect data on the fate of animals at the end of procedures. Under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, licensed establishments are responsible for keeping records which include the fate of the animals. Home Office Inspectors in the Animals in Science Regulation Unit may ask to look at these records at any time. The number of animals used in scientific procedures can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/animals-in-science-statistics. This data is broken down by year and by species and type of procedure.To protect human safety there are legal requirements to test the safety and potency of medicinal products and drug substances containing botulinum toxin. The testing of this medicinal product is required by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Authority (MHRA).In November 2025, the Government published Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, which includes an aim to apply only validated alternative methods in the pharmacopoeial potency testing of botulinum toxin by the end of 2027.

Innovation and Technology, with reference to her Department's policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress she has made in reducing animal use in cardiovascular safety studies.

Basket 2 of the strategy outlines long‑term ambitions which must be science‑led, partnership‑based, and delivered over time.Innovate UK in partnership with NC3Rs launched a funding call supporting the development and commercialisation of alternative methods for assessing the preclinical cardiovascular safety of new medicines: Contracts for Innovation: industrial human relevant drug models – UKRI. This follows work led by IUK and NC3Rs to build a community around this opportunity. https://www.ukri.org/opportunity/contracts-for-innovation-industrial-human-relevant-drug-models/The strategy aims to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of non‑human primates and dogs in dedicated cardiovascular safety studies by at least 50% by 2030.

Innovation and Technology, with reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress she has made on collecting data annually on the number of clinical trial applications that include toxicity tests conducted in 2 species.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 20th April to Question UIN 125672.

With reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress he has made in replacing adventitious agent testing in animals.

I refer the Hon. Member to the answer I gave on 28 April 2026 to Question 128366.

With reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress he has made on defining and applying guidance that permits first in human clinical trial submission for biological therapies where no pharmacologically relevant preclinical animal model exists based only on non-animal data.

In line with the Government’s strategy to replace animals in science, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) supports the use of non-animal approaches where they are fit for purpose and accepts that, where a biological product is not pharmacologically active in animals and no relevant animal model exists, studies in animals, including with surrogate molecules, should not be undertaken and first-in-human applications can be supported using non-animal data, such as in vitro methods and computer modelling, to inform expected human exposure and safety. Further information is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methodsMore broadly, alternative methods used to characterise safety must be demonstrated as fit for their intended purpose, and MHRA guidance, published in March 2026, sets out its current approach to medicines using non-animal methods, including how such approaches can support regulatory submissions and the adoption of validated alternatives as they become available. For potency testing and for adventitious agent testing, separate information for manufacturers on controls for batch release is on the MHRA website explaining how adoption of non-animal methods for these purposes is supported. Further information is available at the following two links:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mhra-approach-to-medicines-using-non-animal-methodshttps://nibsc.org/about_us/our_use_of_animals.aspx

Innovation and Technology, with reference to her Department's policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress her Department has made in (a) developing AI prediction tools and (b) obtaining kinetic data from combining tests with general toxicity testing.

This is an area of extensive effort across industry and stakeholders. NC3Rs are funding development of a virtual dog to replace dogs in second species testing (Virtual Second Species Innovation Platform). We continue working with partners to develop resources to expand these efforts.The strategy has not committed to obtaining kinetic data. Basket 2 sets out long‑term ambitions that must be science‑led, partnership‑based and delivered over time.The strategy aims to use validated alternative methods to reduce use of dogs and non‑human primates in dedicated Pharmacokinetic studies for human medicines by at least 35% by 2030.

For what application are the 3 current active licences which authorise the use of the Forced Swim Test in preclinical animal testing.

The Home Office publishes annual National Statistics on the use of animals in scientific procedures in Great Britain under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.As part of these statistics, information is collected and published on techniques of special interest. In 2024, the statistics included the forced swim test as a technique of special interest for the first time and includes information on the purpose of the research. All procedures were performed for the purpose of basic research in the areas of the nervous, endocrine and sensory systems, and were either mild or moderate severity.The annual statistics for 2025 will be published this year. The published annual statistics are available at:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/animals-in-science-statistics

With reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress he has made on applying only validated alternative methods in the pharmacopoeial potency testing of botulinum toxin.

In line with the Government’s strategy to replace animals in science, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) supports the use of non-animal approaches where they are fit for purpose and accepts that, where a biological product is not pharmacologically active in animals and no relevant animal model exists, studies in animals, including with surrogate molecules, should not be undertaken and first-in-human applications can be supported using non-animal data, such as in vitro methods and computer modelling, to inform expected human exposure and safety. Further information is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methodsMore broadly, alternative methods used to characterise safety must be demonstrated as fit for their intended purpose, and MHRA guidance, published in March 2026, sets out its current approach to medicines using non-animal methods, including how such approaches can support regulatory submissions and the adoption of validated alternatives as they become available. For potency testing and for adventitious agent testing, separate information for manufacturers on controls for batch release is on the MHRA website explaining how adoption of non-animal methods for these purposes is supported. Further information is available at the following two links:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mhra-approach-to-medicines-using-non-animal-methodshttps://nibsc.org/about_us/our_use_of_animals.aspx

With reference to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology's policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress his Department has made in applying only validated alternative methods for pharmacopoeial adventitious agent testing for human medicinal products licensed in the UK.

In line with the Government’s strategy to replace animals in science, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) supports the use of non-animal approaches where they are fit for purpose and accepts that, where a biological product is not pharmacologically active in animals and no relevant animal model exists, studies in animals, including with surrogate molecules, should not be undertaken and first-in-human applications can be supported using non-animal data, such as in vitro methods and computer modelling, to inform expected human exposure and safety. Further information is available at the following link:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methodsMore broadly, alternative methods used to characterise safety must be demonstrated as fit for their intended purpose, and MHRA guidance, published in March 2026, sets out its current approach to medicines using non-animal methods, including how such approaches can support regulatory submissions and the adoption of validated alternatives as they become available. For potency testing and for adventitious agent testing, separate information for manufacturers on controls for batch release is on the MHRA website explaining how adoption of non-animal methods for these purposes is supported. Further information is available at the following two links:https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mhra-approach-to-medicines-using-non-animal-methodshttps://nibsc.org/about_us/our_use_of_animals.aspx

Innovation and Technology, with reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress she has made on replacing the rabbit pyrogen test.

Rabbit pyrogen tests were removed from the British Pharmacopeia in 2025 under this Government, meaning that no rabbit pyrogenicity testing should now be conducted in the UK for any pharmacopoeial pyrogen testing purposes. International (ISO) standards for medical devices may require the use of rabbit pyrogen testing for market authorisation for non-UK markets. Where this is the case Prospective Authorisation would need to be granted by the Home Office, no such tests were carried out in 2025. We are working with the Home Office to ensure that no new licences are approved that include the use of the rabbit pyrogen tests where validated alternatives are available.

Pursuant to the answer of 16 April 2026 to question 121654 on Navy: Dockyards, has the contract now been signed to extend the Future Maritime Support Programme (FMSP) to cover the period from April 2026 up to October 2028.

Progress continues to be made on the extension of the Future Maritime Support Programme. Contracts covering the majority of ship‑related services have been agreed, with the remaining elements in the process of finalisation, while arrangements are in place to ensure continuity of submarine support services ahead of a new contractual agreement expected to commence later in 2026.

Innovation and Technology, with reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress she has made on applying only validated alternative methods for pharmacopoeial pyrogen testing.

Rabbit pyrogen tests were removed from the British Pharmacopeia in 2025 under this Government, meaning that no rabbit pyrogenicity testing should now be conducted in the UK for any pharmacopoeial pyrogen testing purposes. International (ISO) standards for medical devices may require the use of rabbit pyrogen testing for market authorisation for non-UK markets. Where this is the case Prospective Authorisation would need to be granted by the Home Office, no such tests were carried out in 2025. We are working with the Home Office to ensure that no new licences are approved that include the use of the rabbit pyrogen tests where validated alternatives are available.

Innovation and Technology, with reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress she has made on working with regulatory agencies to accelerate the replacement of the Rabbit Pyrogen Test with the Monocyte Activation Test across UK guidelines.

Rabbit pyrogen tests were removed from the British Pharmacopeia in 2025 under this Government, meaning that no rabbit pyrogenicity testing should now be conducted in the UK for any pharmacopoeial pyrogen testing purposes. International (ISO) standards for medical devices may require the use of rabbit pyrogen testing for market authorisation for non-UK markets. Where this is the case Prospective Authorisation would need to be granted by the Home Office, no such tests were carried out in 2025. We are working with the Home Office to ensure that no new licences are approved that include the use of the rabbit pyrogen tests where validated alternatives are available.

With reference to the policy paper entitled Replacing animals in science: A strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods, published on 11 November 2025, what progress he has made on phasing out preclinical animal testing of biologicals where no pharmacologically relevant animal models exist.

Where there is no pharmacologically relevant animal species for testing a biological product, the position of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is that there should be no studies done on animals, and in March 2026, the MHRA published a statement on its website that included this text: “For certain drug substances that are not pharmacologically active in animals, the MHRA does not support testing in animals (including with surrogate molecules). For this group of drugs, non-animal-based methods suffice to support expectations for efficacy and safety in clinical development”. This position is represented to companies that seek scientific advice from the MHRA on drug development in this context. Further information is available at the following two links:https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methodshttps://www.gov.uk/guidance/mhra-approach-to-medicines-using-non-animal-methods