Written questions by McDonnell.

What redeployment options are available to Border Force staff who are potentially unable to work new rosters at Manchester Airport from 1 April 2025.

Manchester Airport Group are investing £1.3 Billion in infrastructure transformation at Manchester Airport. During 2025, the Airport will transition from being a three-terminal operation to two terminals, and forecast passenger growth of 22% over the next two years.As a consequence, Border Force have to reshape their operating model in line with the infrastructure changes. In addition, Border Force at Manchester Airport have seen the introduction of new rosters on an annual basis over several years.The ambition is that all staff will be able to work the new roster. Anyone with a contractual workplace adjustment who is unable to work the roster will be given tailored individual support to secure suitable alternative roles.The programme team have undertaken regular engagement with PCS and will continue to do so.

What recent discussions her Department has held with the PCS union over proposed changes to Border Force rosters at Manchester Airport from 1 April 2025.

Manchester Airport Group are investing £1.3 Billion in infrastructure transformation at Manchester Airport. During 2025, the Airport will transition from being a three-terminal operation to two terminals, and forecast passenger growth of 22% over the next two years.As a consequence, Border Force have to reshape their operating model in line with the infrastructure changes. In addition, Border Force at Manchester Airport have seen the introduction of new rosters on an annual basis over several years.The ambition is that all staff will be able to work the new roster. Anyone with a contractual workplace adjustment who is unable to work the roster will be given tailored individual support to secure suitable alternative roles.The programme team have undertaken regular engagement with PCS and will continue to do so.

What his planned timetable is for bringing forward secondary legislation under the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill once enacted.

The Bill will give us the powers we need to make necessary changes to the product regulation framework. Secondary legislation is subject to the Bill receiving Royal Assent and subsequent parliamentary time in passing any secondary legislation. It is too early to commit to a detailed timetable for secondary legislation, but we will continue to work with stakeholders as this develops.

Whether she has made an assessment of the potential implications for her policies of changes to Civil Procedure Rules on alternative dispute resolution; and if she will have discussions with CEDAWinLAW on mediation.

The Civil Procedure rules are a matter for the Ministry of Justice. MOJ is working to increase the number of legal disputes resolved without the need for a judicial decision. They will monitor the impact of the changes and will continue engaging with stakeholders as they keep all methods of alternative dispute resolution under review to explore opportunities to increase take up both before and after legal proceedings have started. The Secretary of State has not made an assessment of them. With reference to CEDAWinLaw, in the Judicial Review on changes to State Pension age, both the High Court and Court of Appeal found there was no discrimination on any grounds. There is no subsisting legal dispute, so it would not be appropriate for the Secretary of State to enter into mediation with this group.

If his Department will take steps to prevent third-party sellers from selling dangerous goods to consumers.

UK product safety law is clear: all products must be safe. Third-party sellers have clear obligations under legislation where they are either producers or distributors. The Office for Product Safety and Standards carries out a range of regulatory actions to reduce the risk of unsafe products being sold online by third-party sellers. This includes test purchasing, taking enforcement action, providing guidance to sellers, and working with Local Authority Trading Standards and Border Force to undertake co-ordinated interventions. In addition, the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill will provide powers to update the responsibilities of online supply chain actors, including third-party sellers.

If he will (a) list the product regulations that will be reviewed under the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill and (b) make an assessment of the effectiveness of current legislation in protecting consumers from the sale of dangerous toys sold on online marketplaces.

The Product Regulation and Metrology Bill will provide Government with enabling powers to update regulations. The main regulations are listed in the recently published Government response to the Product Safety Review. The Office for Product Safety and Standards runs a national programme to reduce the risk of non-compliant products sold online. Through monitoring and evaluating marketplaces, including purchasing and testing products, we assess the prevalence of unsafe toys and take appropriate enforcement action. While UK regulations are clear that toys must be safe, the Bill will enable regulations to be updated to better reflect modern supply chains, including online marketplaces.

If he will take steps to ensure that market surveillance authorities are adequately resourced to manage new requirements for online marketplaces.

The Product Regulation and Metrology Bill will provide Government with enabling powers to introduce new requirements on online marketplaces. The Office for Product Safety and Standards and local authorities already carry out a range of regulatory actions to reduce the risk of unsafe products being sold online.Government will consider any changes to resourcing requirements for OPSS within the Spending Review and departmental business planning processes. Local authority budgets are set by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and allocated by local authorities according to their priorities.

If he will take steps to ensure that the Office for Product Safety and Standards is adequately resourced to enforce the provisions of the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill.

Capacity already exists to enforce the provisions proposed in the Product Regulation and Metrology Bill in both the Office for Product Safety and Standards (OPSS) and in local authorities. Government will consider any changes to resourcing requirements for OPSS within the Spending Review and departmental business planning processes. Local authority budgets are set by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government and allocated by local authorities according to their priorities.

Communities and Local Government, if she will publish an Equality Impact Assessment of changes resulting from the Elections Act 2022.

The previous Government published the Equality Impact Assessment relating to changes resulting from the Elections Act 2022. This was published on 5 July 2021 and can be found here: Elections Bill equality assessment.We are currently undertaking an evaluation of the impact and implementation of the Elections Act at the recent UK Parliamentary General Election, as set out in legislation. Our evaluation report will be published in due course.

How codes are created for the SNOMED CT classification system in primary care.

Codes are created for SNOMED CT by one of the following organisations:- UK National Release Centre (NRC), hosted by the Technology and Information Standards (TIS) group in NHS England;- SNOMED International, a not-for-profit organisation that owns, administers and develops SNOMED CT;- any other NRC in any other SNOMED CT member country.All requests made to NHS England must be compliant with the Editorial Policy and are processed in accordance with the SNOMED CT UK Edition Governance and Change Request Process. Concepts are added or changed in SNOMED CT by NHS England terminologists in line with International and UK Editorial Principles as defined by SNOMED International at the recommendation of international clinical advisory groups. The authoring process includes a technical quality assurance and peer review. Once the authoring process has been completed and quality assured, the files are published on the Terminology Reference data Update Distribution website.There is currently a code in SNOMED CT for myalgic encephalomyelitis. The Fully Specified Name (FSN) is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’. The FSN for a code is not intended for use by a clinician. Instead, a clinician is expected to make use of the synonyms for the code, which include myalgic encephalomyelitis.Clinical systems usually display a ‘preferred term’, deemed to be the most clinically appropriate way of expressing a concept. The preferred term for the code ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’ is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome’.NHS England is reviewing the preferred term to align it with the current most clinically appropriate term for the UK, with the preferred term ‘ME/CFS - myalgic encephalomyelitis/ chronic fatigue syndrome’ being considered.

If he will ensure that a code is created for myalgic encephalomyelitis in the SNOMED CT classification system in primary care.

Codes are created for SNOMED CT by one of the following organisations:- UK National Release Centre (NRC), hosted by the Technology and Information Standards (TIS) group in NHS England;- SNOMED International, a not-for-profit organisation that owns, administers and develops SNOMED CT;- any other NRC in any other SNOMED CT member country.All requests made to NHS England must be compliant with the Editorial Policy and are processed in accordance with the SNOMED CT UK Edition Governance and Change Request Process. Concepts are added or changed in SNOMED CT by NHS England terminologists in line with International and UK Editorial Principles as defined by SNOMED International at the recommendation of international clinical advisory groups. The authoring process includes a technical quality assurance and peer review. Once the authoring process has been completed and quality assured, the files are published on the Terminology Reference data Update Distribution website.There is currently a code in SNOMED CT for myalgic encephalomyelitis. The Fully Specified Name (FSN) is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’. The FSN for a code is not intended for use by a clinician. Instead, a clinician is expected to make use of the synonyms for the code, which include myalgic encephalomyelitis.Clinical systems usually display a ‘preferred term’, deemed to be the most clinically appropriate way of expressing a concept. The preferred term for the code ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’ is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome’.NHS England is reviewing the preferred term to align it with the current most clinically appropriate term for the UK, with the preferred term ‘ME/CFS - myalgic encephalomyelitis/ chronic fatigue syndrome’ being considered.

When the Chief Executive of the Government Property Agency will respond to the correspondence of (a) 31 July, (b) 16 August and (c) 26 September 2024 from the PCS union.

The Chief Executive of the Government Property Agency will endeavour to prioritise a response to the specific issues highlighted in the next few days, no later than 1 November.

Whether her Department is responsible for responding to Freedom of Information Act requests relating to Gov Facility Services Limited.

Gov Facility Services Limited (GFSL) is responsible for responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. Further information on timeliness of response to Freedom of Information requests can be found within GFSL’s Annual Report and Accounts, published annually on gov.uk.

When she plans to respond to the requests on insourcing made by trade unions in their meeting with her on 18 July 2024.

The Government is committed to ensuring professional Facility Management services across its prison estate. Our approach to securing delivery will be set out later this year.Ministry of Justice officials regularly engage with Trade Union officials on the Lord Chancellor’s behalf regarding the future of Gov Facility Services Limited and the delivery of facilities management services across the Prison and Probations estate.

What recent assessment she has made of the potential merits of insourcing the work currently undertaken by Government Facilities Services Limited.

The Government is committed to ensuring professional Facility Management services across its prison estate. Our approach to securing delivery will be set out later this year.Ministry of Justice officials regularly engage with Trade Union officials on the Lord Chancellor’s behalf regarding the future of Gov Facility Services Limited and the delivery of facilities management services across the Prison and Probations estate.

Whether Gov Facilities Services Limited is subject to her Department’s public sector equality duty.

Gov Facility Services Limited (GFSL) is not listed as a public authority in Schedule 19 of the Equality Act 2010, however as it is publicly funded, public sector equality duties apply. Further information on how GFSL address the requirements set out in the Equality Act 2010 can be found within GFSL’s Annual Report and Accounts, published annually on gov.uk.

What data her Department holds on Government Facilities Services policy on recognition of trade unions since its formation.

The Department does not hold this data. Gov Facility Services Limited (GFSL) staff are subject to the Company’s own terms and conditions, and GFSL does not recognise any trade union under a formal agreement. Further information on GFSL’s staff policies can be found within its Annual Report and Accounts, published annually on gov.uk.

If he will list all sites (a) owned and (b) operated by his Department in Germany.

The following sites are currently owned by the Ministry of Defence in Germany. SiteCity/TownAYRSHIRE BARRACKSMONCHEGLADBACHATHLONE BARRACKSPADERBORNNORMANDY BARRACKSSENNELAGER Included as part of Normandy Barracks group:Antwerp BarracksTalbot BarracksCavalry BarracksPolish BarracksDepot 90Sennelager NAAFIBRITISH ALPINE CENTRE GERMANYWITTENBERG The British Army also uses the Wulfen site in Dorsten for ammunition storage, however this site is German owned.

How many Ministry of Defence personnel were based in Germany on 16 October 2024, broken down by location.

The number of Ministry of Defence (MOD) Personnel, by location, as at 1 July 2024 can be found below. Total MOD Personnel1,230by region: North Rheine - Westphalia410Bavaria70Elsewhere/Unspecified750MOD Personnel includes UK Armed Forces Regulars, MOD Civil Servants and Locally Engaged Civilians.The figures are based on service personnel’s stationed location and not their location of residence. Personnel deployed on operations to an area away from their stationed location are shown against their most recent stationed location. The Royal Navy/Royal Marines personnel on sea service are included against the country containing the home port of their ship.Figures by location can only be provided as at 1 July 2024, rather than 16 October 2024, in line with published statistics.Elsewhere/ Unspecified includes all regions where there are a small number of personnel to prevent inadvertent disclosure and personnel where their exact location is unspecified. This also includes Locally Engaged Civilians, as location data below country level is not available for this cohort. The numbers of MOD Personnel stationed in Germany, 1 April 2007 - 1 April 2024 can be found below. DateMOD Personnel01 April 200730,38001 April 200829,49001 April 200926,55001 April 201026,13001 April 201124,71001 April 201222,79001 April 201320,14001 April 201417,20001 April 201512,87001 April 20167,24001 April 20175,58001 April 20185,24001 April 20194,41001 April 20201,25001 April 20211,13001 April 20221,15001 April 20231,18001 April 20241,200 Notes/caveats MOD Personnel includes UK Armed Forces Regulars, MOD Civil Servants and Locally Engaged Civilians.The figures are based on service personnel’s stationed location and not their location of residence. Personnel deployed on operations to an area away from their stationed location are shown against their most recent stationed location. The Royal Navy/Royal Marines personnel on sea service are included against the country containing the home port of their ship.Data prior to 1 April 2007 is not held.

What assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of funding allocated to research into (a) myalgic encephalomyelitis and (b) long covid.

The Department funds research in health and social care through the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). The NIHR and the Medical Research Council (MRC) are committed to funding high-quality research to understand the causes, consequences, and treatment of long COVID and myalgic encephalomyelitis, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), and are actively exploring next steps for research in these areas. This includes a roundtable I hosted on long COVID on 17 October 2024, which included discussion on how long COVID research is relevant to other post-viral syndromes and how to stimulate the research community to undertake future research.Over the last five years, the NIHR has invested almost £2.3 million in research programme funding for ME/CFS. In addition, the NIHR and the MRC are also providing £3.2 million of co-funding towards the DecodeME study, which aims to understand if there is a genetic component to the condition, and in doing so increase our understanding of ME/CFS to support the development of diagnostic tests and targeted treatments.In the same period, the Government, through the NIHR and the MRC, has invested over £57 million in long COVID research, with almost £40 million of this through two specific research calls on long COVID. The NIHR specifically has invested £42.7 million towards research funding for long COVID. The projects funded aim to improve our understanding of the diagnosis and underlying mechanisms of the disease and the effectiveness of both pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies and interventions, as well as to evaluate clinical care.The NIHR welcomes funding applications for research into any aspect of human health including ME/CFS and long COVID. These applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money, and scientific quality. In all areas, the amount of NIHR funding depends on the volume and quality of scientific activity.Publishing the consultation response and delivery plan for ME/CFS is a key priority for me.