Written questions by McMurdock.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, what the projected savings to the public purse are as a result of reduced consultations.

Policy analysis is currently ongoing to develop recommendations to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy. We have already identified initial targeted first steps, but this is a significant piece of work requiring ministerial decisions across a range of policy areas. We are developing our plan of work and raising our ambition. Once this has been agreed, we will be in a position to develop quantifiable metrics in terms of resource savings to the public purse.

What steps her Department is taking to help ensure that students are not disadvantaged by errors made in the initial approval of student finance.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, if he will make an assessment of which cabinet decisions since July 2024 would have been sped up as a result of the proposed reform to the process for collective Cabinet agreement of government policy.

It has not proved possible to respond to the Hon Member in the time available before Prorogation

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, whether Ministers will publish a list of consultation and reporting requirements that are removed or amended under the reforms.

No decision has currently been taken on which requirements have been removed or amended under the reforms.Any removal of statutory consultation duties will require legislation, and so parliament will be able to scrutinise these changes in the ordinary way.

Media and Sport, pursuant to the Answer of 31 March 2026 to Question 123457, on Local Government and Voluntary Organisations: Social Impact Bonds, whether local authorities which are not currently covered by Mayoral Strategic Authorities will be invited to bid for Better Futures Fund funding.

DCMS remains in the design stages of the Better Futures Fund (BFF), therefore, the amount of funding allocated to different delivery partners across England remains subject to development. However, the BFF will be place-based and the Government is committed to ensuring the Fund provides adequate coverage across England. This should include providing appropriate opportunities for local authorities not currently covered by a Mayoral Strategic Authority to apply for BFF funding.

What recent guidance her Department has issued to education providers regarding the eligibility of students to receive maintenance loans on courses.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, whether any primary legislation will be required to implement the changes announced on 26 March 2026.

The government is committed to identifying existing disproportionate reporting and consultation duties that are slowing down delivery. The policy analysis is in the early stages and all options are being considered.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what criteria will be used to determine whether an overseas company can transfer its incorporation to the UK.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.Are solvent.Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

What assessment she has made of whether current staffing levels are sufficient to maintain effective inspection coverage.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

What technologies are currently used to support container inspections, including non-intrusive scanning and risk-based targeting systems.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, whether companies from all jurisdictions will be eligible to re-domicile to the UK under the proposed reforms.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.Are solvent.Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

What steps her Department is taking to reduce the time taken to inspect shipping containers at ports while maintaining accuracy.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether nomination to be the Essex County Council representative on the Joint Committee will be determined by (a) the full council, (b) the local county councillors, (c) the district council, or (d) someone else.

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process. Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation. The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second. As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, why his Department believe the usual criteria are unlikely to be met in the same way as a full review, regarding the initial proposal of ward boundaries.

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process. Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation. The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second. As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of the number of individuals who currently are in debt who will be affected by the affordable repayment plans under the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

How many shipping containers entering the UK were subject to physical inspection in each of the last three years.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to ensure fair and equal representation of voters in light of his Department’s stated expectation that the usual criteria are unlikely to be met in the same way as a full review.

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process. Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation. The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second. As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Communities and Local Government, pursuant to his Department’s letter to Essex councils dated 26 March 2026, whether the total number of councillors per new local authority can be amended from the currently announced figures during the initial local government boundary review process.

The Department’s letter of 26 March set out the Secretary of State’s decisions for inclusion in the proposed Structural Change Order, including the intended total number of councillors for each new council, based on the proposals submitted. Those figures will inform the Order, subject to the Parliamentary process. Interim warding arrangements are required to support first elections to new councils. They differ from a full electoral review, reflecting the need to put transitional arrangements in place within the available timetable for reorganisation. This is the usual process for reorganisation. The Local Government Boundary Commission for England is responsible for delivering fair electoral and boundary arrangements for English councils. It is an independent body accountable to Parliament that reviews the electoral and boundary arrangements of councils and is responsible for calculating the appropriate number of Councillors per authority and assessing the appropriate ward boundaries, taking into account local issues. The Commission intend to undertake a full electoral review of all new councils after their first election and before their second. As set out in the letter, Joint Committees will be established for each new council area and will comprise members drawn from the relevant predecessor authorities. The process for nominating members will be determined by those councils within the framework provided by the Order.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what safeguards will be in place to prevent companies relocating to the UK to avoid regulatory or legal obligations in their original jurisdiction.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, whether companies relocating under the proposed regime will be required to settle outstanding tax liabilities in their original jurisdiction.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.