Written questions by Chowns.

What is the (a) average time and (b) target time for a substantive response to enquiries by the MP hotline.

Awaiting answer.

With reference to the Answer of 22 October 2025 to Question 80479 on Personal Independence Payment, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of increasing decision making resource on reducing median clearance times for mandatory reconsiderations.

Awaiting answer.

How many UK exports of highly hazardous substances listed in Parts II and III of GB Prior Informed Consent Regulation are exported using the waiver from explicit consent from the importing country; and what estimate his Department has made of the number of exports permissible under changes to Article 14 Chemicals (Health and Safety)(Amendment, Consequential and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026.

Information about waivers used in the past five years under the Great Britain (GB) Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Regulations is in the table provided below: Year Exports notifiedWaivers used for export202596212 (1.2% of exports notified)202485324 (2.8% of exports notified)202391421 (2.3% of exports notified)202291922 (2.4% of exports notified)2021101725 (2.5% of exports notified) Prior to 2021, and so during the time when the United Kingdom was a member of the European Union, waivers were issued by the European Commission. The current waiver provision in the GB PIC Regulations applies hazard criteria to the use of the waiver for those chemicals that are listed under the Rotterdam Convention (i.e., those chemicals listed in Part 3 of the GB PIC list). This goes beyond what the Convention requires and potentially creates a barrier to the export of a chemical that falls within these criteria when the importing country fails to respond to repeated requests for consent to import. In order to facilitate regulatory decision-making, harmonise conditions, and create greater clarity for businesses, the draft Chemicals (Health and Safety) (Amendment, Consequential and Transitional Provision) Regulations 2026 includes an amendment to Article 14(7) in the GB PIC Regulations. This will ensure the same waiver conditions apply to all chemicals that require explicit/prior informed consent to import.

If the Health and Safety Executive will publish a regularly updated list of GB exports of highly hazardous substances listed in Annex II and III of GB PIC that are permitted using the waiver for explicit consent, including (a) the importing country, (b) the UK company, (c) the substance exported and tonnage band and (d) the reasons for which the export met the waiver conditions.

There is no statutory requirement to publish information on waivers used under the Great Britain (GB) Prior Informed Consent (PIC) Regulations. However, each year, companies have to report the name of the chemical in the GB PIC list that they have exported or imported during the previous calendar year, the quantity of the chemical, and the name of the importing or exporting country. The Health and Safety Executive, as the Designated National Authority, publishes that information on its website: https://www.hse.gov.uk/pic/annual-reporting.htm.

Pursuant to the answer of 7 November 2025 to question 86273, which variables determine whether the automated system is able to identify two sets of monthly earnings in one Universal Credit assessment period.

In most cases, claimants who receive two sets of monthly earnings in one Universal Credit assessment period are identified automatically and their award is corrected. This reflects established policy intent and is implemented through system coding based on data received from HM Revenue and Customs. However, a small number of cases are not picked up by the automated process because of the complexity of the claimant’s individual circumstances. This usually arises in situations where earnings do not follow a consistent or standard pattern, making them harder for automated systems to assess accurately. This can include irregular pay patterns or variations in how employers report earnings through Real Time Information (RTI). In these cases, earnings may not follow a standard pattern that the system can correct automatically, and manual intervention is required to ensure the claimant receives the correct Universal Credit entitlement.

With reference to the written statement of 11 November 2025 on Pension Update, HCWS1044, if he will make an assessment of the effectiveness of Automatic Pension Forecast letters relating to communication of State Pension age changes for 1950's born women.

The Secretary of State announced in his oral statement of 11 November 2025 that we will retake the decision made in December 2024 as it relates to the communications on State Pension age. This was because findings from a 2007 report had not been drawn to the attention of the previous Secretary of State as its potential relevance to the making of her decision was not evident at the time. The process to retake the decision is underway and it is important that we give this full and proper consideration. We will update Parliament on the decision as soon as a conclusion is reached.

Pursuant to the Answer of 13 May 2025 2025 to Question 50550 on Personal Independence Payment: Appeals, what steps he is taking to reduce the median clearance time for mandatory reconsiderations.

We intend to reduce the median clearance time by increasing decision making resource for Mandatory Reconsiderations, including by recruiting new decision makers

With reference to the consultation entitled: HSE Chemicals Legislative Reform Proposals, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of divergence from European standards on chemicals with compliance with the EU-UK trade and cooperation agreement.

The reforms set out in the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) consultation on Chemicals Legislative Reform proposals aim to give HSE greater flexibility and scope to make necessary or appropriate regulatory decisions in Great Britain (GB) at pace with international partners, including the European Union (EU) and rest of the world where appropriate. The proposals are intended to maintain current levels of protection for people and the environment from harmful chemicals and are therefore not expected to impact on the UK’s compliance with the Trade and Co-operation Agreement. Part of this consultation delivered the commitment made in the Regulatory Action Plan (RAP) on how international approvals can be recognised to reduce the time and cost to bring chemicals products, including biocides, to the GB market.The proposals include a new system to recognize international approvals from "trusted jurisdictions" where the regulatory standards are "similar to and at least as high as" those in GB. This is likely to include the EU given the similarity in the regulatory standards. The proposals are intended to remove the duplicative processes and associated evaluation costs.A key safeguard is that the Secretary of State with responsibility for HSE would retain the power to refuse an approval from a trusted jurisdiction if it is deemed "harmful to GB interests," such as for the protection of public health or the environment.No decisions have been made as HSE is currently analysing the consultation responses, following closure of the recent consultation on 18 August, and any changes will be subject to parliamentary approval.

How many and what percentage of (a) personal independence payment awards are open-ended, (b) open-ended PIP awards are for recipients over pension age and (c) open-ended PIP awards are awarded to people who claim under the special rules for terminally ill people.

For information on the percentage of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) awards which are ongoing please see Section 4 ‘Clearance outcomes – Awards’ of the Personal Independence Payment Publication here. Information on the volume of total ongoing awards and ongoing awards for recipients over State Pension age is not published. The percentage of the total caseload for which claims are made under Special Rules For End of Life (SREL) can be found also be found in Section 4 ‘Clearance outcomes – Awards’

Pursuant to the Answer of 12 June 2025 to Question 57896 on Funeral Payments, how many applicants (a) responsible for funeral costs and (b) in receipt of a qualifying benefit did not receive a social fund funeral expenses payment because (i) there was an immediate family member or (ii) a close relative of the deceased who was not in receipt of a qualifying benefit, in each of the last five years.

The information requested is not held centrally and to provide it would incur a disproportionate cost.

How people who are responsible for funeral costs and in receipt of a qualifying benefit have an application for a Social Fund Funeral Expenses Payment refused because of the family tests in the eligibility criteria in each of the last five years.

Table 1 shows the number of applicants responsible for funeral cost who were receipt of qualifying benefits but were refused a Funeral Expenses Payment due to the family test reasons below:There is a surviving partnerThere is a closer relativeThey are not a partner, friend or relative Table 1: Funeral Expense Payments- Refusals linked to the Family Test 2020/212021/222022/232023/242024/25Number of Refusals1,1009001,2001,2001,000 Notes:- These figures have been estimated using unaudited internal DWP Management Information which is not quality assured to the same extent as Official / National statistics.- These applicants are assumed to have been responsible for funeral costs and to have been in receipt of a qualifying benefit.- Figures have been rounded to the nearest 100.

Where an application for a Social Fund Funeral Expenses Payment is refused because another family member of the person who died is not in receipt of a qualifying benefit, what assessment her Department makes of that person’s (a) ability and (b) willingness to take responsibility for the funeral costs.

The eligibility criteria for Funeral Expenses Payments are designed to ensure the scheme is fair for taxpayers while supporting the most vulnerable with these costs. The Funeral Expenses Payment regulations provide for those cases where there is more than one person who could be responsible for a funeral. Where one of these individuals is not in receipt of a qualifying benefit, the Department does not provide a Funeral Expenses Payment. We do not assess the ability or willingness of this individual to take responsibility for the funeral. If there is no one able or willing to pay for the funeral, Local Authorities can arrange a public health funeral.

How many applicants who were (a) responsible for funeral costs and (b) in receipt of a qualifying benefit were denied a Social Fund Funeral Expenses Payment because of the family tests in the eligibility criteria in each of the last five years.

Table 1 shows the number of applicants who were refused a Funeral Expenses Payment for the below reasons:There is a surviving partnerThere is a closer relativeThey are not a partner, friend or relative Table 1: Funeral Expense Payments- Refusals linked to the Family Test 2020/212021/222022/232023/242024/25Number of Refusals1,1009001,2001,2001,000 Notes:- These figures have been estimated using unaudited internal DWP Management Information which is not quality assured to the same extent as Official / National statistics.- These applicants are assumed to have been responsible for funeral costs and to have been in receipt of a qualifying benefit.- Figures have been rounded to the nearest 100.

Pursuant to the Answer of 6 May 2025 to Question 49218 on Social Security Benefits: Medical Examinations, whether her Department plans to (a) make an assessment of the potential merits of exploring more tailored mechanisms to reduce the frequency of assessments for people with (i) Myalgic Encephalomyelitis and (ii) other clearly documented, severe and long-term health conditions where improvement is unlikely and (b) involve (A) people with lived experience and (B) relevant charities in the (1) development and (2) implementation of such mechanisms.

As stated in our response to Question 49218, we are not planning to exempt specific conditions, but we are planning to reduce reassessments for those with the most severe conditions.We aim to do this in Universal Credit through guaranteeing that for both new and existing claims, those with the most severe, life-long health conditions, who will never be able to work, will not need to be reassessed in the future. In PIP, we are exploring ways we could use evidence from other services to reduce the need for some people with very severe conditions to undergo a full functional assessment. In the Green Paper, we also promised to review the PIP assessment to make sure that it is fit for the future. I shall lead the review in close consultation with disabled people, disabled people’s organisations, and other experts. To get this right, I am bringing together stakeholders to agree the scope and timing of the review. I will then publish Terms of Reference for the review in due course.

With reference to the Green Paper entitled Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper, published on 18 March 2025, if she will take steps to prevent people with (a) lifelong and severely disabling illnesses and (b) Myalgic Encephalomyelitis from having to undergo repeated reassessments.

Our wide-ranging package of reforms to health and disability benefits, set out in the Pathways to Work Green Paper, will improve experiences of the system for those who need it. The functional impact and severity of a condition can significantly vary across individuals, so we are not planning to exempt specific conditions, but we are planning to reduce reassessments for those with the most severe conditions.We aim to guarantee that for both new and existing Universal Credit claims, those with the most severe, life-long health conditions, who will never be able to work, will not need to be reassessed in the future. Our plans to improve experiences of Personal Independence Payment also include reducing assessments for this group. We are exploring ways we could use evidence from eligibility for other services to reduce the need for some people with very severe health conditions and disabilities to undergo a full PIP functional assessment.

What assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of the proposed changes to disability benefits set out in the (a) Green Paper entitled Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working, published on 18 March 2025 and (b) report entitled Spring Statement 2025 health and disability benefit reforms - Impacts, published on 26 March 2025 on demand for (i) NHS and (ii) adult social-care services.

No assessment has been made.Information on the impacts of the Pathways to Work Green Paper will be published in due course, and some information was published alongside the Spring Statement. These publications can be found in ‘Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper’(opens in a new tab).A further programme of analysis to support development of the proposals in the Green Paper will be developed and undertaken in the coming months.

With reference to the Green Paper entitled Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working, published on 18 March 2025, if she will make an assessment of the potential impact of the four-point minimum eligibility threshold on the ability of people with (a) fluctuating illnesses and (b) Myalgic Encephalomyelitis to claim PIP.

Information on the impacts of the Pathways to Work Green Paper will be published in due course, and some information was published alongside the Spring Statement. These publications can be found in ‘Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working Green Paper’(opens in a new tab).A further programme of analysis to support development of the proposals in the Green Paper will be developed and undertaken in the coming months.

With reference to the Green Paper entitled Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working, published on 18 March 2025, what criteria she plans to use to identify claimants with serious and lifelong health conditions to ensure they will never face reassessment.

The assessment process is an important part of claiming PIP and WCA to ensure that people receive the right level of support. However, for some people with very severe health conditions and disabilities, by the time they come to make a claim, they have already undergone intensive assessments and provided detailed evidence about their condition to receive support from other services. That is why in PIP, we are also exploring ways in which we could use evidence from eligibility for other services to reduce the need for some people with very severe health conditions to undergo a full PIP functional assessment. For example, for young people with very severe long-term conditions who have already been assessed for and awarded support from Disability Living Allowance for children before claiming PIP for the first time. For those on UC with the most severe, life-long, conditions who we know will never be able to work, we will aim to exempt them from ever needing to be reassessed.

What steps she is taking to reduce the time taken to reach decisions on Attendance Allowance applications.

Attendance Allowance is currently undergoing a significant modernisation through the piloting of an online digital claim process. We are using customer feedback to design a transformed application that is shorter and easier, which focuses on collecting only the information we need to make a decision. This pilot will also support decision makers to handle claims more quickly with a significant reduction in requests for further information from customers.

Pursuant to the Answer of 9 August 2024 to Question HL407 on Rodenticides: Safety, to which species the Government Oversight Group is considering extending the monitoring of Second-Generation Anticoagulant Rodenticide residues.

A final decision on which additional species to include in the residues monitoring programme has not yet been taken. However, the species under consideration include red kite, buzzard, sparrowhawk, peregrine falcon, red fox, otter and hedgehog.