Written questions by Amos.

Communities and Local Government, what progress he has made on implementing the Private Parking Code of Practice; what steps the Government is taking to ensure that penalty charges issued by private parking operators are fair and proportionate; and whether a timetable has been set for introducing caps on such charges and measures to prevent aggressive enforcement tactics.

I wish to assure you that this government is determined to drive up standards in the private parking sector. The new government code will contain guidance about the operation and management of private parking facilities and will protect motorists from bad practice, whilst supporting legitimate operators. In preparation for the new code, in 2025 the government published a consultation document outlining its proposals to raise standards across the private parking industry. All responses are now being analysed and the government will publish a response and outline its final plans in due course.

Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that executors are not held personally liable for council tax bills, including empty property premiums, on properties undergoing probate where Class F exemptions apply, particularly in cases where probate is delayed and executors have no access to estate funds.

When a property has been left empty following the death of its owner or occupant, it is exempt from council tax for as long as it remains unoccupied and until probate is granted. Where probate is delayed, the exemption will continue until probate is granted. Following a grant of probate (or the signing of letters of administration), a further six months exemption is possible, so long as the property remains unoccupied and has not been sold or transferred to someone else.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of mechanisms the Child Maintenance Service has to verify care arrangements with (a) local authorities and (b) schools; and whether collection action can be paused pending such verification.

To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules. If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government. The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides. CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent. Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements. Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.

What the average time taken is for the Child Maintenance Service to adjust liability following notification of a change in care arrangements.

The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) works to ensure that liability adjustments following changes in care arrangements are processed as quickly and accurately as possible. These changes can vary in complexity, and the time taken depends on factors such as the availability of corroborating information from both parents and whether there is agreement on the new arrangements. Where there is disagreement or insufficient evidence, additional checks are required, which can extend the timescale. The CMS is expanding digital channels and online messaging to allow parents to submit information more quickly, helping to reduce delays. The Department for Work and Pensions does not currently publish an official average timescale for adjustments to child maintenance liability following notification of a change in care arrangements (for example, shared care or main carer modifications). Therefore, the information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost. However, CMS remains committed to improving timeliness and accuracy in processing changes by investing in service modernisation, enhancing digital tools, and streamlining processes to deliver a faster and fairer service for all customers.

What processes are in place to (a) refund and (b) recoup Child Maintenance Service payments made in error following incorrect care-status determinations.

To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules. If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government. The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides. CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent. Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements. Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.

What steps his Department is taking to ensure that Child Maintenance Service liability accurately reflects actual care arrangements, including in cases where the paying parent has become the primary carer but Child Benefit remains registered to the other parent.

To qualify for maintenance payments a child must meet the Child Maintenance Service's (CMS) criteria. They must be under 20 years of age and in full time non-advanced education or approved training, and eligible for Child Benefit. They must also be habitually resident in the UK and usually living in the same household as the receiving parent. Child maintenance defines a child the same way as Child Benefit does to offer consistency across rules. If the CMS is satisfied that both parents have equal day-to-day care for the child, in addition to sharing overnight care, there is no requirement for either parent to pay child maintenance. There is no statutory definition of day-to-day care; our definition is broadly aligned with that of Child Benefit, where an ‘overall care test’ is used. This provides consistency across government. The CMS shared care rules are designed to reflect the financial responsibilities of both parents based on the care provided to the child. The inclusion of overnight stays as a measure of shared care is intended to offer a clear, administrable way to assess the level of care each parent provides. CMS does not routinely contact local authorities or schools to verify care arrangements. Instead, it relies on evidence provided by parents and applies an “overall care test” aligned with Child Benefit principles. Receipt of Child Benefit is regarded as a strong indicator of entitlement but, in circumstances where parents dispute the level of shared care, caseworkers consider all relevant evidence. A decision is made on the balance of probability to determine who provides day-to-day care. Where this evidence indicates a change in primary care, the CMS will update and adjust maintenance liability, even if Child Benefit remains registered with the other parent. Collection activity is not automatically paused during verification, but CMS can exercise discretion where there is clear evidence of a dispute over care arrangements. Where payments have been made in error following an incorrect care-status determination, CMS has processes to refund overpayments to the paying parent and, where appropriate, to recoup funds from the receiving parent. Reimbursement decisions are discretionary and consider whether the overpayment resulted from CMS error and whether the paying parent has requested repayment.

If he will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing an expedited pathway for Child Maintenance Service cases involving (a) safeguarding concerns, (b) homelessness risk or (c) significant financial hardship.

The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) is committed to ensuring that it delivers a safe service that is sensitive to the needs of all the parents that use it. We recognise that some parents may be vulnerable, particularly at a time of separation. It is our priority to handle these cases in a sensitive manner and ensure vulnerable customers get the help and support they need to use the service safely. The CMS already has processes in place to identify safeguarding concerns and is well prepared to respond quickly and effectively if it becomes aware that the safety of any of its customers are at risk. All caseworkers receive extensive training and follow a well-managed process with clear steps to support vulnerable customers. The CMS recognises socio-economic factors such as deprivation, unmanageable debt, poor housing, and unemployment, CMS Caseworkers use a District Provision Toolkit (DPT) with clear steps to support vulnerable clients, including those at risk of homelessness. This toolkit is regularly reviewed. Caseworkers also use the Affordability Hub for signposting and Advanced Customer Support (ACS) to support all customers who are vulnerable and deemed at risk from abuse, harm or neglect. These tools are available at any and every stage of the case journey, not just at applications. DWP has recruited Advanced Customer Support Senior Leaders (ACSSLs), forming a nationwide network of support that provides clear escalation routes for cases. ACSSLs are instrumental in forming strong, far reaching, external relationships with a range of partner organisations and across DWP’s internal teams. Internally, ACSSLs have a responsibility to raise any service design or delivery issues that are identified as potential causes of negative customer experience, escalating these to the appropriate teams.

Communities and Local Government, whether his Department has plans to review the legislation governing Class F council tax exemptions, specifically the treatment of inherited properties that were occupied at the time of death and vacated more than six weeks later; and whether he will consider extending exemptions to cover the probate process and up to 12 months after probate is granted, regardless of occupancy status at the time of death.

Properties which are unoccupied because the occupant has passed away, and probate has been granted on their estate, are exempt from council tax from the point of death until six months after the grant of probate or the signing of letters of administration (a class F exemption). Where the property remains occupied by another person, it is liable for council tax in the same way as any other property. The Government has no plans to amend class F council tax exemption.

Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to allocate funding to support the Great South West Partnership from April 2026.

Following a four-week public consultation, in March 2025 the Government announced its intention to end funding for Pan-Regional Partnerships, with an exceptional, time-limited award of £281,250 for the Great South West Pan-Regional Partnership for the 2025/26 financial year. Pan-Regional Partnerships, including the Great South West, have made a valuable contribution, supporting collaboration between local authorities and government and taking forward a breadth of work on shared growth opportunities. However, as our English Devolution White Paper sets out, we are now moving to a different model of regional collaboration, where we are keen to support new models driven by local leaders.

What assessment his Department has made of the impact of economic factors and the consumption of ultra-processed foods on the prevalence of diet-related illnesses and mental health conditions, and what steps are being taken to address these upstream determinants of public health.

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) considered the evidence on the impact of processing on health, including mental health, in 2023 and 2025. The SACN concluded that the observed associations between higher consumption of processed and ultra processed foods and adverse health outcomes are concerning. The SACN noted that studies to date appear to inconsistently account for important factors such as socioeconomic status.The SACN recommend that on balance, most people are likely to benefit from reducing their consumption of processed foods high in energy, saturated fat, salt, and free sugars, and which are low in fibre. These recommendations align with existing policies for supporting healthier diets and advice to consumers. The SACN will keep the topic of food processing and health under review.The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs’ 2024 report on Food Insecurity also considered inequalities in access to a healthy sustainable diet. Data from the latest National Diet and Nutrition Survey report shows that participants in higher income households, and households in less deprived areas, were closer to meeting some dietary recommendations. However, where diets failed to meet recommendations, this was consistent across the range of income and deprivation.The Department of Health and Social Care is working closely with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to develop their cross-Government Food Strategy, which aims to improve affordability and access to healthier food, to help both adults and children live longer, healthier lives.Earlier this year, the Government committed to reviewing the School Food Standards to reflect the most recent Government dietary recommendations. Free school meals will also be extended to all children from households in receipt of Universal Credit from September 2026.Healthy Start provides funding to pregnant women, babies, and young children under four years old from very low-income households to support a healthier diet. In April 2026, the value of weekly payments will increase by 10%.The Department is working closely with the Child Poverty Taskforce to develop and deliver an ambitious strategy to reduce child poverty.

Communities and Local Government, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of clarifying whether regulation 25A of the Building Regulations that relates to Approved Document L includes extensions where the new wall or roof area adds 25% to the surface area of the building.

Regulation 25A of the Building Regulations 2010 concerns the use of high-efficiency alternative systems in new buildings and does not apply to extensions. The energy efficiency standards that apply to extensions to existing dwellings are set out in Approved Document L: Conservation of fuel and power, Volume 1 (dwellings), Section 10.

If he will set out whether any military bases within the UK are being used for non-military purposes.

Currently, three military bases have been made available to the Home Office to support their efforts in providing accommodation for asylum seekers.In addition, the Ministry of Defence permits third parties to use its bases for activities, provided these are compatible with military operations. This arrangement also generates income for the Department.

What steps he is taking to ensure seamless patient care for communities living on county boundaries, such as those between Somerset and Devon; and if he will take steps to (a) ensure interoperability of clinical records between NHS trusts and (b) issue guidance to Integrated Care Boards to prevent treatment restrictions based on administrative boundaries.

The Government's 10-Year Health Plan includes the objective of delivering a single patient record. This will allow staff, wherever they deliver care, to access the key information they need, from all of an individual’s medical records. Mandatory information standards, which all providers have to follow, will ensure the interoperability of systems within the National Health Service.NHS England’s Who Pays? guidance sets out a framework for establishing which NHS organisation has responsibility for commissioning an individual’s care and which has responsibility for paying for that care. It came into effect from 1 August 2025 and can be found at the following link:https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/who-pays-determining-which-nhs-commissioner-is-responsible-for-commissioning-healthcare-services-and-making-payments-to-providers/The Strategic Commissioning Framework for integrated care boards (ICBs) seeks to ensure that ICBs take a consistent approach to commissioning services, to secure the best outcomes for their population. It can be found at the following link: https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/strategic-commissioning-framework/ ICBs are responsible for undertaking health needs assessments to understand the health and wellbeing needs of their local population, including identifying inequalities and planning services accordingly.

Food and Rural Affairs, if she will make it her policy that Core Reform 3 of the Bathing Water (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2025 will not be used for (a) the purposes of cost cutting and (b) to change the classification of a bathing water.

Core Reform 3 introduces discretion to set more locally tailored bathing seasons and monitoring periods that better reflect bathing water usage. To amend a site’s bathing season, there would need to be a robust evidence base to support this action including that due account had been taken of all public comments and suggestions. Details of implementation will be worked through in partnership with the Environment Agency through a small-scale pre-implementation research project. Following this analysis, we will publish guidance and expand stakeholder engagement to further develop this reform.

What the current level of availability is for service family accommodation; how this level has changed over the last five years; and what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Afghan resettlement programme on those levels of availability.

The Department did not record data to accurately determine stock availability until April 2023. As this information cannot be gathered retrospectively, data prior to this date is unavailable. The table below shows a year-on-year comparison of Service Family Accommodation (SFA) availability from April 2023 to April 2025, including current availability as at November 2025. Apr 23Apr 24Apr 25Nov 25Total SFA47,79347,77047,63847,697Number of available vacant properties1,978 (4.14%)1,372 (2.88%)2,213 (4.65%)2,745 (5.76%) The allocation of SFA for the Afghan Resettlement Programme has been carefully planned to minimise the impact on Service families. This involves utilising surplus SFA, properties earmarked for disposal, and void properties requiring refurbishment. Refurbishing otherwise unfunded void properties not only supports SFA demand but also delivers a lasting benefit to the Ministry of Defence.

Food and Rural Affairs, what steps she is taking to ensure the methodology for Core Reform 2 of the Bathing Water (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2025 will be subject to effective scrutiny.

The consultation on reforms to the Bathing Water Regulations 2013 ran from 12 November to 23 December 2024. We are committed to working with stakeholders to ensure that feasibility and disproportionate cost are assessed through transparent and robust modelling and analysis.

What steps her Department is taking to reduce the time taken to process tax refund applications by HMRC; and if she will make a statement on measures to improve efficiency and accountability in HMRC’s service delivery.

HMRC recognise that repayments are important for customers. They prioritise them to ensure they are processed as quickly and securely as possible. HMRC balance the provision of prompt payments to eligible customers with effective revenue protection from fraudsters. For Self Assessment repayments for example, once the repayment is created it goes through automated fraud and compliance checks. In 2024-25, after these checks, 93.1% of the repayments were paid automatically within a few days. HMRC continues to invest in automation and to review their internal processes to ensure repayments are issued as quickly as possible. HMRC recognise too the importance of keeping the customer, and where appropriate the customer’s representative, informed of progress and are exploring ways of doing that more effectively. In the meantime, HMRC’s online ‘Where’s My Reply’ tool can help customers understand when they can expect to receive a response.

What estimates his Department has made of the time it will take to get all service family accommodation up to the Decent Homes Standard.

As set out in the recommendations of the Defence Housing Strategy, the Defence Housing Service will develop proposals to address the condition and standards of overseas family homes. As a baseline, we are using the 2006 Government’s Decent Homes Standard for all Defence family homes in the UK, regardless of location. Where needs differ as a result of property location, proposals will be developed as part of the ongoing work of the Defence Housing Strategy. This Government’s historic £9 billion Defence Housing Strategy will deliver a generational renewal of military homes, with nine in 10 Defence homes modernised or upgraded.Work to raise the minimum standard of 1,000 of the worst military family homes has proceeded at pace across the UK since April 2025, with works due to complete by the end of December 2025.

Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department plans to take to help ensure that new towns adopt approaches that incorporate (a) high-quality and (b) environmentally resilient green places.

The government has been clear that the next generation of new towns must be well-connected, well-designed, sustainable, and attractive places where people want to live and have all the infrastructure, amenities, and services necessary to sustain thriving communities. On 28 September 2025, the government published the independent New Towns Taskforce report as well as its initial response to that report. Both can be found on gov.uk here. Chapter 3 of the Taskforce’s final report sets out placemaking principles. The government initial response welcomed the Taskforce’s emphasis on ensuring new towns are designed in line with a placemaking approach which should form the building blocks of any new towns, ensuring that they are places where people are proud to live and work.

Communities and Local Government, whether he plans to ensure that (a) high-quality (i) landscape design and (ii) green infrastructure proposed in planning applications are protected during construction and (b) long-term funding models for (A) management and (B) maintenance are provided through the planning process.

The National Planning Policy Framework emphasises the importance of a network of high-quality open spaces for the health and wellbeing of communities and the environment. The National Design Guide, which supports the Framework, makes clear that well-designed places consider management and maintenance regimes from the early stages of the design process and document them in a management plan. A Local Planning Authority (LPA) can attach conditions to the grant of planning permission. These could be used to secure the implementation and protection of landscape design and green infrastructure within a development. LPAs can also use planning obligations to restrict or prescribe the use of land, require specific activities to be carried out in relation to a development, and require payment to a local authority. Planning obligations could include requiring a developer to make payments towards the management and maintenance of green infrastructure.