Written questions by Wood.

What plans he has to make (a) primary legislative, (b) secondary legislative, (c) statutory guidance or (d) non-statutory guidance changes to activity under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

I refer the Hon Member to my previous answer (UIN122783).

Whether his Department considers that electronic messages held on non-corporate devices relating to official government business held by (a) Ministers and (b) Special Advisers are owned by the Government.

Official information, wherever stored, is considered to be held by the Crown. I refer the Member for Kingswinford and South Staffordshire to the Government’s 2023 ‘Guidance on Using Non-Corporate Communication Channels for Government Business’ for further detail that was produced and published under by the previous Government.

Whether his Department has issued guidance to special advisers on speaking to the police about stolen Government property.

Cabinet Office's Security Breach Policy requires individuals, including SpAds, to follow directions from Cabinet Office Security when there is a security breach, such as theft of Government property. As part of its standard operating procedures Cabinet Office Security will direct individuals to report any stolen Government property to the police and request a crime reference number.

What steps did Darren Tierney, then the head of the Propriety and Constitution Group, take to ensure that Lord Mandelson was personally interviewed before his appointment as Ambassador.

No such interview took place. It is not unusual for political appointments to take place without direct conversations with the Cabinet Office. I refer the Hon Member to the Government's statement and release of information on 11th March which sets out the process of appointment and the steps the Government is taking to strengthen the process going forwards.

Pursuant to the answer of 19 March 2026, to Question 120612, on Government Departments: Vetting, whether individuals joining the Civil Service are advised on giving false or misleading information in any other part of their application and vetting process.

Civil Servants applying for NSV Security Vetting (NSV) are advised of their responsibilities throughout the process and through the guidance published on gov.uk. This includes the need for full and complete disclosure.

Pursuant to the answer of 4 March 2026, to Question 111932, on Lord Mandelson, what assessment has been made of why the letter from Lord Glasman to the Prime Minister's Office on the probity of Lord Mandelson was not copied across to the official record.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer of 9 February 2026, Official Report, PQ 111932.

Whether his Department has issued guidance on whether a Minister can be suspended.

The Cabinet Office has not issued such guidance. The Ministerial Code sets out the standards of conduct expected of ministers and how they discharge their duties. As the Code sets out, the Prime Minister is the ultimate judge of the standards of behaviour expected of a minister and the appropriate consequences of a breach of those standards.

Pursuant to the answer of 20 March 2026, to Question 119894, on Gambling Commission: Managers, which specific public sector regulators (a) are and (b) are not subject to the Business Appointments Applications process.

The Business Appointment Rules (BARs) apply to various individuals through specific codes of conduct. For instance, civil servants are subject to them via the Civil Servant Management Code, ministers through the Ministerial Code, and Special Advisers via their Code of Conduct. Where a public sector organisation, such as an Executive Agency or an Advisory Non-Departmental Public Body, is staffed by civil servants, those individuals will be subject to the BARs. Even though some individuals operating within the broader government sphere may not fall directly under the BARs, public bodies operating at arm’s length from government are still expected to implement their own equivalent processes to manage potential conflicts of interest, with these being tailored to their specific organisational context.

Whether all communications on Morgan McSweeney’s mobile phone were uploaded to Government servers.

There is established guidance on the management and recording of electronic communications on non-corporate channels. We keep all guidance around the use of non-corporate communications under review to ensure it remains fit for purpose.

Whether the Metropolitan Police has asked the Government to not publish any communication between Morgan McSweeney and Peter Mandelson.

I refer you to the remarks the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister made to the house in response to the urgent question about the Humble Address on 16 March.

On what date the Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary sent guidance on the transfer of group electronic messages to the Cabinet Office division handling the Humble Address.

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 the Oral Statement on the 23rd February, in the name of the Chief Secretary to the Prime Minister, which set out an update on the Government's process and that Departments have been instructed to retain material that may be relevant to the motion.

Whether electronic communications between Lord Mandelson and Morgan McSweeney have been copied to the official record and retained for the Humble Address.

I refer you 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. All government departments, ministers and relevant individuals have been instructed to retain and provide to the Cabinet Office all information they hold that falls in scope of the Humble Address motion.

What is the status of the Cabinet Office fact-finding investigation into Labour Together, separate to the report by the Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards.

The fact-finding exercise has concluded. The Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards wrote to the Prime Minister on this issue on 27 February. His letter is available online: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69a32870f534e7e99adaeaf8/Letter_from_the_Independent_Adviser_to_the_Prime_Minister.pdf

Pursuant to the answer of 19 March 2026 to Question 120625 on Parliamentary and Political Service Honours Committees: Public Appointments, which two members were appointed by a reserve list; and for what reason a reserve list was used.

Professor Stephanie Rickard and Craig Stephenson OBE were appointed to the Parliamentary and Political Service Committee, from the reserve list, in October 2024. Both had applied during the fair and open March 2024 campaign and were found appointable by the Advisory Assessment panel. As per the Governance Code on Public Appointments (December 2016 version), where a vacancy occurs within 12 months of the conclusion of a previous appointments process, and the role and person specification for both posts are the same, departments may put forward appointable candidates from the reserve list from the first competition for appointment to the new vacancy.

Pursuant to the answer of 9 March 2026 to Question 117761 on Cabinet Office: Public Expenditure, for what reason expenditure by the Prime Minister's Office is not counted as Cabinet Office expenditure.

I refer the Rt Hon Member to the answer to PQ 122164.

What steps his Department took between 4 July and August 2024 to promote the take up of the King's portrait programme.

His Majesty The King’s free Portrait Scheme was a voluntary programme offering a free, framed portrait of The King to any eligible public institution that requested one. A range of communication activities were undertaken to promote the programme.The Cabinet Office continued to communicate with eligible authorities until the close of the programme. This included direct communications, press releases, and updates on gov.uk. Following the conclusion of the scheme, a breakdown of the take up was published on gov.uk.

Pursuant to the answer of 19 March 2026 to Question 116770 on Public Appointments: Internet, whether departments have a deadline for adding Direct Ministerial Appointments to the portal.

As set out in the preceding question (116770), the responsibility for the publication of information on Direct Ministerial Appointments rests with individual sponsor departments. The Guidance on Making Direct Ministerial Appointments states that it is for individual departments to decide the most appropriate processes to strategically manage the DMAs that they make, which will include adding existing DMAs to the portal.

For what reason he plans to introduce a mandatory retirement age for the House of Lords.

As set out in the Government’s manifesto, the Government recognises the good work of many peers who scrutinise legislation and hold the government of the day to account.However, reform to the House of Lords is long overdue and essential. The Government’s objective is to bring about a renewed focus on active contribution, within a smaller House of Lords that better reflects the country it serves. The Government is therefore committed to introducing a mandatory retirement age for members of the House of Lords.

Pursuant to the answer of 19 March 2026 to Question 121096 on Cabinet Office: Email, whether Lord Mandelson was copied into any of those emails.

Lord Mandelson was a copy recipient of some of the emails, one of a number of officials and advisers copied into the emails.

What assessment his Department made of the potential impact of the work-in-progress data backlog for the Civil Service Pension Scheme of the outgoing supplier on Capita.

The Cabinet Office awarded the contract to administer the Civil Service Pension Scheme to Capita in November 2023 under the previous government. The issues and delays facing a number of civil servants and pension scheme members in receiving their pension quotes are unacceptable. I want to reassure you that this Government has taken firm action to help put things right as soon as possible. We have agreed a clear recovery plan with Capita, which includes specific milestones and accountability targets for delivery. For priority cases, we have deployed additional resources and improved communication with affected colleagues, so that staff, both former and serving, receive the quality of service and support they deserve. Existing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) have been enhanced and strengthened to deliver improved performance and higher penalties for failure, including financial penalties. These have already applied in respect to Capita's performance with recent issues and delays in administering the Civil Service Pension Scheme. Capita has made lump sum payments to 10,147 members, the majority of whom have retired but are not yet receiving their pension, and are on track to bring these members into regular pension payments by the end of April. To provide immediate financial support to those who may need it, arrangements are in place for interest-free bridging loans typically up to £5,000 or £10,000 in exceptional cases to most recent retirees facing payment delays. This is alongside interim lump sum payments being made to provide immediate funds to retiring members. The pension scheme continues to make monthly pension payments to approximately 730,000 existing pensioner members on time. The Cabinet Office has mandated Capita that they must restore service levels by the end of June 2026. We are using every commercial lever at our disposal, including withholding payments for deliverables that have not been met. We also reserve the right to take further formal action to ensure the service returns to the required standards.The latest position of the Civil Service Pension Recovery Plan Update is available at this weblink: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-service-pension-recovery-plan-updates