Written questions by Betts.

If he will direct the FSA to publish the terms of reference and timetable for conduct of their review of current and emerging abattoir technologies and their potential regulatory use including what plans they have to consult industry stakeholders.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) works closely with the meat industry on the introduction of new technology in abattoirs. Whilst it is for businesses to determine what technology they wish to invest in and deploy, the FSA is keen to collaborate on these initiatives to understand any impacts on regulation and any associated benefits for food safety, animal welfare standards, and business growth. For example, the FSA and industry trade bodies have recently developed a joint protocol for the deployment of automated faecal contamination technology in abattoirs. The FSA also recently commissioned independent research into new technologies in meat official controls, which involved engagement with both trade bodies and individual businesses. This research will be published later this year.

When the FSA last reviewed and updated the scientific evidence, research and data underpinning the Official Controls legislation referred to in PQ Answer 120762.

In 2022, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) completed an operational transformation programme and launched a new operational modernisation programme in 2023. These aim to improve the quality and cost effectiveness of the delivery of official controls through enhanced capability and better use of technology.Beyond strategic review programmes, the FSA continually reviews how Official Controls Regulations are implemented in FSA-approved establishments and regularly updates the publicly available Manual for Official Controls. The FSA conducts and commissions research to ensure regulations remain evidence-based and proportionate.

How many major food incidents have there been in each of the last 5 years and of those how many were meat related.

In responding to food and feed safety incidents and foodborne disease outbreaks, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) categorises its handling of incident responses at Routine or Non-routine levels. Non-routine incident and outbreak responses are escalated where it is considered that their successful management requires levels of resources and authority beyond those available for routine incident handling. In the calendar years 2021 to 2026, the FSA escalated three meat related incidents and outbreak responses to Non-routine status. This was from a total of 15 Non-routine incidents in that period. All three of these meat related incidents were escalated within the calendar year 2023. The following table shows the number of incidents/outbreak responses escalated to Non-routine status for the calendar years 2021 to 2026: Calendar yearNumber of incidents/outbreak responses escalated to Non-routine status202122022220235202432025220261Total15

How many billing errors the Food Standards Agency made in charging food business operators for Official Controls in each of the last 3 years, and what was the total monetary value of these in each of these years.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) does not centrally record billing errors for Official Controls in the format requested. Therefore, it is not possible to provide a definitive count of billing errors made in charging food business operators for Official Controls, nor the total monetary value of such errors, for each of the last three years.The FSA operates financial management and assurance processes designed to minimise errors in invoicing, including routine reconciliation and review procedures. Where errors are identified, these are corrected through our standard processes, and any necessary adjustments are made to ensure that charges accurately reflect the cost of Official Controls delivered.The FSA continues to keep its billing and assurance processes under review to ensure accuracy, transparency, and fairness for food business operators.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has made representations to representatives of the Government of Israel on the treatment of Marwan Barghouti.

The UK is deeply concerned by reports of mistreatment of detainees by Israeli forces and raises this issue with the Israeli government. The UK has been consistently clear that all detainees must be treated with dignity and in full accordance with international law, and that such allegations must be thoroughly investigated. The UK continues to call on the Government of Israel to grant the International Committee of the Red Cross immediate and unrestricted access to all detention facilities.

Whether his Department will a) review the ongoing data collection work of the British Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy registry and b) work with partners in the space to identify opportunities to support further development of the registry, to drive improvements in care and treatment for patients with graft-vs-host disease.

The UK Stem Cell Strategic Forum’s 2022 report, A ten-year vision for stem cell transplantation and cellular therapies, set out a number of recommendations for improving data collection for haematopoietic stem cell transplantation and cellular therapy (HSCT-CT) to drive improvements in care and treatment of HSCT-CT patients, including those with graft-vs-host disease. The report is available at the following link:https://www.nhsbt.nhs.uk/who-we-are/performance-and-strategy/stem-cell-and-advanced-cellular-therapy-strategy/Following on from the report recommendations, the forum has established a HSCT-CT Data Commission to create an enhanced, accessible, and sustainable data model for UK HSCT-CT data, with collaboration across the British Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, the UK Aligned Registry, NHS England and the devolved counterparts, patients, academia, and industry. The Department will consider any proposals made by the commission.The Department is also exploring how to support the report’s recommendations on data through the extension of the Department’s stem cell programme funding.

What plans his Department has to consider transplants, including stem cell and bone marrow transplants, as part of the Getting It Right First Time programme.

There are no current plans to consider transplants, including stem cell and bone marrow transplants, as part of the Getting It Right First Time programme. The Department is aware of challenges around the timely provision of well-matched stem cell donors, particularly for people from mixed heritage or ethnic minority backgrounds, and therefore instead intends to review the factors underlying this and the system supporting stem cell donation.

What steps his Department is taking to ensure that access to CAR‑T therapies for mantle cell lymphoma is consistent across the UK, in the context of its continued availability in Scotland.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is re-evaluating brexucabtagene autoleucel following managed access through the Cancer Drugs Fund to determine whether it should be recommended for routine National Health Service funding. NICE’s draft guidance, published in December, does not recommend it as a clinically and cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. The Government recognises that any potential withdrawal for future patients with mantle cell lymphoma will be concerning, but these decisions are rightly taken independently and based on the available evidence. Under an arrangement between NHS England and the company, if NICE’s final guidance does not recommend routine use, patients who started treatment during the managed access period can continue their treatment.NICE is an England-only body. Medicine availability decisions in the devolved administrations are for the relevant devolved governments.

What assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of the removal of access to a CAR-T therapy for mantle cell lymphoma on patients; and if his Department will consider learnings from other health systems that have provided access.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) is re-evaluating brexucabtagene autoleucel following managed access through the Cancer Drugs Fund to determine whether it should be recommended for routine National Health Service funding. NICE’s draft guidance, published in December, does not recommend it as a clinically and cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. The Government recognises that any potential withdrawal for future patients with mantle cell lymphoma will be concerning, but these decisions are rightly taken independently and based on the available evidence. Under an arrangement between NHS England and the company, if NICE’s final guidance does not recommend routine use, patients who started treatment during the managed access period can continue their treatment.NICE is an England-only body. Medicine availability decisions in the devolved administrations are for the relevant devolved governments.

What steps he is taking to ensure that the Food Standards Agency is subject to an appropriate level of Parliamentary scrutiny.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) was established by the Food Standards Act 1999 as a non-ministerial Government department. The FSA is accountable to the Westminster Parliament, the Senedd, and the Northern Ireland Assembly through health ministers in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland respectively.The FSA’s annual report and accounts are laid before the Westminster Parliament, the Senedd, and the Northern Ireland Assembly. The 2024/25 report is available at the following link:https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/Westminster%20Annual%20Report%20and%20Accounts%202024-25.pdfThe FSA is accountable to Parliament directly through select committees and regularly engages with them. The Chief Executive of the FSA recently gave oral evidence to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee in October 2025 and the Industry and Regulators Committee in January 2026.

If he will direct the Food Standards Agency to publish details of the overhead costs associated with charging businesses for meat hygiene controls, specifically the costs of (a) administering the billing and discounting system and (b) correcting billing errors.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has for many years published comprehensive information on how its meat charges are made up annually. This information can be found in Cost Data Slides available on its website, at the following link:https://www.food.gov.uk/business-guidance/charges-for-controls-in-meat-premisesThe costs of administering the FSA’s charging and discounts system, including correcting billing errors, are factored into its charges as a proportion of the work carried out by the finance function. As indicated on page 44 of the Cost Data Slides relating to England and Wales, £0.18 million is budgeted for this for the forthcoming 2026/27 financial year. As indicated on page 41, a proportion of this amount relates to billing and collecting charges, which includes correcting billing errors.

What plans he has to introduce more effective uses of technology and science evidence-based approaches to the delivery of Official Controls by the Food Standards Agency.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) supports evidence‑based use of technology in Official Controls, but inspection requirements in abattoirs are set in assimilated European Union law Regulation, and are prescriptive, and divergence could restrict British access to the EU and other markets. The FSA has commissioned a review of current and emerging abattoir technologies and their potential regulatory use and is sharing learning internationally to inform future modernisation while maintaining food safety and animal health and welfare standards.The FSA applies a science-based, evidence led approach to delivery of official controls. Decisions are informed by risk assessments, data analysis, and established scientific principles to ensure that controls are proportionate, targeted, and effective, and adopt risk-based decisions, for example in the setting of audit frequencies, microbiological testing requirements for food business operators or its own enforcement activity. Under Article 1 of assimilated Regulation (EC) 852/2004, meat businesses are legally responsible for the safety and compliance of the food they produce, as in other sectors. However, Official Controls for meat are more prescriptive in legislation than for many other foods, so any move to a different delivery model would require legislative change.

If he will bring food businesses responsible for processing meat and meat products in line with the regulatory approach used elsewhere in the food industry by allowing them to be fully responsible for the product they produce.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) supports evidence‑based use of technology in Official Controls, but inspection requirements in abattoirs are set in assimilated European Union law Regulation, and are prescriptive, and divergence could restrict British access to the EU and other markets. The FSA has commissioned a review of current and emerging abattoir technologies and their potential regulatory use and is sharing learning internationally to inform future modernisation while maintaining food safety and animal health and welfare standards.The FSA applies a science-based, evidence led approach to delivery of official controls. Decisions are informed by risk assessments, data analysis, and established scientific principles to ensure that controls are proportionate, targeted, and effective, and adopt risk-based decisions, for example in the setting of audit frequencies, microbiological testing requirements for food business operators or its own enforcement activity. Under Article 1 of assimilated Regulation (EC) 852/2004, meat businesses are legally responsible for the safety and compliance of the food they produce, as in other sectors. However, Official Controls for meat are more prescriptive in legislation than for many other foods, so any move to a different delivery model would require legislative change.

For what reason the meat processing industry is subject to permanent on‑site regulatory presence and inspection of every item; what the evidentiary basis is for this practice; and how this level of oversight compares with that applied to other industries.

The official controls legislation, Regulation (EU) 2017/625, sets clear requirements to undertake ante-mortem and post-mortem official inspections and the verification of compliance with food law, animal health, and welfare rules in slaughterhouses and game handling establishments. To perform these official controls, it is necessary to have official physical presence. This level of regulatory presence is limited to those activities identified as presenting the highest risk to the food chain. Meat processing establishments are not generally subject to such supervision unless they are also engaged in those high-risk activities. Conformance with these requirements is critical to protect public health, animal health and welfare, assure food safety and underpin international trade in products of animal origin. The legislation provides for certain flexibilities in the way official controls are delivered.The legislation is drafted to reflect scientific evidence, research and data with a strong focus on public health, animal health and welfare whilst minimising unnecessary burden for businesses. Other industries are also subject to a regulatory framework for inspections and verification which is proportionate to the risks they present.

What steps she has taken to ensure that the hotel sector has not been disproportionately impacted by the rise in business rates.

At the Budget, the VOA announced updated property values from the 2026 revaluation. This revaluation is the first since the pandemic, which has led to significant increases in rateable values for some properties as they recover from the pandemic. To respond to those who are seeing large increases, the Government has already acted to limit increases in bills, announcing a support package worth £4.3 billion package at the Budget. The Government is also introducing new permanently lower tax multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure (RHL) properties. These new tax rates will benefit over 750,000 properties. The Government has heard concerns from hotels about the ways they are valued for business rates and has committed to reviewing this.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the business rates system on the hotel sector.

At the Budget, the VOA announced updated property values from the 2026 revaluation. This revaluation is the first since the pandemic, which has led to significant increases in rateable values for some properties as they recover from the pandemic. To respond to those who are seeing large increases, the Government has already acted to limit increases in bills, announcing a support package worth £4.3 billion package at the Budget. The Government is also introducing new permanently lower tax multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure (RHL) properties. These new tax rates will benefit over 750,000 properties. The Government has heard concerns from hotels about the ways they are valued for business rates and has committed to reviewing this.

What assessment she has made that the support offered to the hotel sector on business rates is sufficient to protect jobs and investment, in the context of the significant rise in valuations.

At the Budget, the VOA announced updated property values from the 2026 revaluation. This revaluation is the first since the pandemic, which has led to significant increases in rateable values for some properties as they recover from the pandemic. To respond to those who are seeing large increases, the Government has already acted to limit increases in bills, announcing a support package worth £4.3 billion package at the Budget. The Government is also introducing new permanently lower tax multipliers for eligible retail, hospitality and leisure (RHL) properties. These new tax rates will benefit over 750,000 properties. The Government has heard concerns from hotels about the ways they are valued for business rates and has committed to reviewing this.

What assessment she has made of the cumulative implications for the hotel sector of (a) the recent changes to business rates, (b) the rise in employers’ National Insurance Contributions and (c) the rises in the rates for the National Minimum and Living Wages.

The Government recognises the important contribution that the hotel and wider hospitality sectors make to the economy, to local communities and to the UK’s appeal as a destination for domestic and international tourists. The potential impacts of changes on this sector are carefully considered as part of policy development. Where changes are made, relevant impact notes and assessments are published at fiscal events and otherwise as necessary, in line with the Government’s usual practice. The Treasury also engages regularly with the hospitality sector to understand the challenges they face. The Government continues to provide targeted support to the hospitality sector through the tax system and other policies and keeps all areas of the tax system under review, with future decisions taken at fiscal events under the normal process.

Pursuant to the Answer of 5 January 2026 to Question 89382 on Social Services: Investment, whether his Department plans to consider the (a) previous and (b) forecast (i) levels and (ii) adequacy of (A) private and (B) public sector capital funding in social care in England.

The Government will consider the capital funding needs of adult social care as part of the next Spending Review. We have recently announced an additional £50 million for the Disabled Facilities Grant (DFG) in 2025/26. This could fund approximately 5,000 home adaptations supporting older and disabled people to live more independently in their homes, and brings the total DFG amount this year to £761 million. We have also confirmed £723 million for the DFG in 2026/27. The DFG budget across 2025/26 and 2026/27 is £150 million more than the total budget across the previous two years, 2023/24 and 2024/25. This represents an 11% increase that exceeds inflation.Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities are tasked with the duty to shape their care markets to meet the diverse needs of all local people. This includes assessing current and future local provision of adult social care services and working with their local market to ensure that both present and anticipated demand can be met.

Pursuant to the Answer of 5 January 2026 to Question 89382 on Social Services: Investment, whether his Department plans to (a) increase public sector funding and (b) incentivise private sector investment in social care in England.

We are progressing towards a National Care Service based on greater choice and control, joined up services, and higher quality of care, with over £4.6 billion of additional funding available for adult social care by 2028/29 compared to 2025/26. We have no direct plans designed to incentivise private investment. Under the Care Act 2014, local authorities are tasked with the duty to shape their care markets to meet the diverse needs of all local people and are responsible for deciding how they spend the funding made available to them for adult social care, unless it is ringfenced for a particular purpose.While private adult social care providers are individual businesses and the Government does not intervene in their operations, we have been clear that the expectation is for adult social care providers to behave responsibly, including through sustainable financial arrangements that support the sector and meet need as required.