Every parliamentary written question tabled by Julian Lewis this session, with the full answer and department. Back to the MP page.
Showing 1–13 of 13 · Cabinet Office
Who first suggested to the Prime Minister that Peter Mandelson should be appointed as Ambassador to the United States.
I refer the Hon Member to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address. The Government is working to ensure that Parliament’s instruction is met with the urgency and transparency that it deserves.
For what reason Question 111416 on Jeffrey Epstein and Lord Mandelson, tabled on 6 February for answer on 11 February 2026, has not been answered; and when he plans to answer it.
An answer was made to UIN 111416 on 4 March.https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-02-06/111416
What procedures will apply to enable access by the Intelligence and Security Committee to such documentation necessary to fulfil the duties placed upon it n relation to dealings between Peter Mandelson and Jeffrey Epstein.
I refer you to the Government's response to the Urgent Question tabled on 12th February, the Written Ministerial Statement in the name of the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister that same day, and Oral Statement on the 23 February which set out an update on the Government's process for complying with the Humble Address motion. We will set out further details in due course. The Government wishes to ensure that Parliament’s instruction is met with the urgency and transparency that it deserves.
Whether the National Security Adviser (a) has briefed and (b) will brief the Intelligence and Security Committee on the sensitive security implications of the proposed new Chinese super-embassy in London.
The Government and the National Security Adviser maintain a regular and constructive dialogue with the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) across the full range of national security and intelligence matters
What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the time taken by public inquiries investigating specific adverse events in the last five years on (a) analysing past errors, (b) making preventative recommendations for the future, and (c) attributing blame.
The Government is committed to righting past wrongs and working to ensure victims get answers. Inquiries shed light on injustices of the past, provide a means for victims and survivors to finally have their voices heard, and can help to rebuild trust in national institutions. The Government recognises that there is growing criticism of Inquiry cost, duration and effectiveness. The government is actively considering whether there are changes that could enable inquiries to deliver outcomes and enable lessons to be learnt more swiftly and at lower cost.This is a substantial piece of work, led by the Cabinet Office, that will aim to improve how we identify wrongs, and get to the truth more quickly. We will continue to keep Parliament updated on this important subject.
What structures are in place for annual performance reviews for senior civil servants; and what assessment he has made of the potential impact of those arrangements on (a) adequate scrutiny and (b) enhanced productivity.
Members of the Senior Civil Service (SCS) are subject to an annual performance review process, governed by the central SCS performance management framework published on Performance management framework for the Senior Civil Service (2025 to 2026 performance year) - GOV.UK The central framework is regularly reviewed to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Changes were introduced in April of this year, to ensure a greater focus on the productivity of the Senior Civil Service. This included the introduction of minimum standards, expected distribution and a cross-Government consistency check meeting.
How many quangos his Department has dealings with; and what assessment he has made of the potential merits of reducing the number of these bodies.
‘Quangos’ is an obsolete term. They are now called Arm’s Length Bodies. The list of all Government Arm’s Length Bodies (ALBs) can be found here [https://co-public-bodies.github.io/ALB_Landscape_Analysis_2023_24/08%20profilePagesIndex.html] along with the details of the 11 ALBs that Cabinet Office directly sponsors. In April the Government announced a review of all ALBs across government with a view to streamline governance and reduce bureaucracy. This review is ongoing.
When he plans respond to Question 50047 tabled on 6 May 2025 for answer on 12 May 2025.
With apologies to the Hon. member, a response has now been issued.
When the Prime Minister plans to respond to the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament on its Iran Report, sent to him on 27 March 2025.
The government will respond to the ISC regarding publication of its report on Iran in due course.
On how many occasions UK National Security Advisers have appeared as witnesses in front of (a) Commons, (b) Lords and (c) joint committees in each year since 2010; and if he will list those committees.
National Security Advisers and Deputy National Security Advisers have previously appeared in front of a range of Parliamentary Committees when necessary and appropriate to do so. This includes the Commons Defence Committee, the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, the Commons Public Accounts Commission, the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, the House of Lords EU Sub-Committee, the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, and the Intelligence and Security Committee. Information on attendance at individual Committee evidence sessions is published by the relevant Committee, except in some limited circumstances on national security grounds.
Pursuant to the Answer of 27 February 2025 to Question 32906 on Government Department: Telephone Services, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the removal of dedicated telephone numbers from the List of Ministerial Responsibilities on the ability of hon. Members to speak to staff in Ministers' private offices; and whether the default method of corresponding by email is the only option now available to hon. Members.
Departments publish email addresses as the first means of contacting Ministers. All departments have processes to ensure correspondence via email reaches the intended Minister or team in a rapid manner, meaning there should be no reduction in the ability of MPs to contact Ministers' private offices. MPs may, in any such email correspondence, request a phone call with a departmental official or a member of the Minister's private office.
With reference to the oral contribution of the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, on 13 January 2025 on Artificial Intelligence Opportunities Action Plan, Official Report, column 61, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the (a) development and (b) deployment of AI tools to respond to emails sent to Ministers on the ability of hon. Members to hold Governments to account.
The Government continues to consider the use of artificial intelligence in all Government services. The potential impacts of using these tools in responding to correspondence from Parliamentarians and members of the public, and the implications for the function of correspondence to hold the Government to account, will form part of the Government’s ongoing considerations.
If he will list each Department which (a) continues to and (b) no longer provides telephone numbers to Members of Parliament for its (i) Parliamentary Branch and (ii) for its Correspondence Section to pursue constituents' concerns; and whether it is government policy to prevent parliamentarians being able to speak directly to ministers' Private Office staff.
The List of Ministerial Responsibilities, published on GOV.UK, provides Members of Parliament with contact details for each Government department. It provides a single point of contact for each department, through which all Members of Parliament can pursue constituents’ concerns. This policy has been in place since October 2023 and was introduced following security advice. As outlined in the Guide to Handling Correspondence, also published on GOV.UK, the default method of correspondence with Government departments is via official departmental email addresses.