Written questions by Harding.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has made representations to her United Arab Emirates counterpart on reports of gold originating from Sudan being exported to, processed in and re-exported from the UAE.

The trade of illicit gold funds conflict, undermines the rule of law, and perpetuates human rights abuses. Gold extraction and smuggling operations represent a significant loss to Sudan and undermine effective resource governance. The UK Government engages with the gold industry, in particular the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the World Gold Council, as well as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to support responsible sourcing and rigorous due diligence standards to enhance resilience to illicit gold and identify malign actors in the supply chain. As an OECD member, we have committed to businesses in the UK applying the OECD's Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk areas, including the LBMA. The UK is a global leader in tackling illicit gold flows, recently hosting a joint FCDO-HMRC Gold Conference and launching a public-private partnership with industry to clamp down on illicit flows. We will continue to urge all countries to refrain from actions that prolong the crisis, including those that may financially benefit the warring parties. On 20 July 2023, the UK announced sanctions targeting 13 individuals and businesses linked to the actions of Russia's Wagner Group including alleged involvement in the exploitation of gold resources in Sudan. Sanctions policy remains under review. We do not comment on possible plans for future designations.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the United Kingdom’s sanctions regime relating to Sudan in preventing gold originating from that country from entering UK markets, including where such gold has been processed or refined in third countries; and whether she plans to introduce additional sanctions and import controls.

The trade of illicit gold funds conflict, undermines the rule of law, and perpetuates human rights abuses. Gold extraction and smuggling operations represent a significant loss to Sudan and undermine effective resource governance. The UK Government engages with the gold industry, in particular the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the World Gold Council, as well as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to support responsible sourcing and rigorous due diligence standards to enhance resilience to illicit gold and identify malign actors in the supply chain. As an OECD member, we have committed to businesses in the UK applying the OECD's Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk areas, including the LBMA. The UK is a global leader in tackling illicit gold flows, recently hosting a joint FCDO-HMRC Gold Conference and launching a public-private partnership with industry to clamp down on illicit flows. We will continue to urge all countries to refrain from actions that prolong the crisis, including those that may financially benefit the warring parties. On 20 July 2023, the UK announced sanctions targeting 13 individuals and businesses linked to the actions of Russia's Wagner Group including alleged involvement in the exploitation of gold resources in Sudan. Sanctions policy remains under review. We do not comment on possible plans for future designations.

What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the regulatory framework governing the import of gold linked to conflict and human rights abuses; what steps his Department is taking to improve oversight and enforcement in that area; and whether he has compared those measures to the European Union’s approach.

The trade of illicit gold linked to conflict undermines the rule of law and has no place in UK supply chains and our global economy. The Government engages with the gold industry, in particular the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the World Gold Council, as well as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development to support responsible sourcing and rigorous due diligence standards.In the Trade Strategy, the Government launched a review into responsible business conduct. The review is still progressing and considering the effectiveness of the UK's current regime and the merits of alternative measures to support responsible business practices. We shall update the House when the review is complete.

What steps his Department is taking to help ensure that UK fashion brands comply with labour standards in their global supply chains; and what enforcement mechanisms are in place to address violations.

The Government expects all UK businesses to respect human rights and the environment throughout their supply chains in line with the OECD Guidelines and UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Section 54 of the UK’s Modern Slavery Act 2015 requires businesses with a turnover of £36m or more to publish modern slavery statements.The Office for Responsible Business Conduct promotes the OECD Guidelines and provides a non-judicial grievance mechanism for complaints of non-observance by UK businesses.The Government also launched a review in the Trade Strategy, into the UK’s approach to responsible business conduct, focused on tackling human rights and labour abuses and environmental harms in global supply chains. We shall update the House when the review is complete.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has made an assessment of the adequacy of the long-term (a) funding, (b) staffing and (c) remit of the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI); and whether she plans to bring forward proposals to (i) reduce resources, (ii) alter the independence and (iii) limit the operations of ICAI.

I refer the Hon Member to the Minister for Development's appearance before the International Development Committee on 20 January, where she addressed issues around the future of the Independent Commission for Aid Impact (ICAI) at length. Decisions on how the Official Development Assistance budget will be used up to 2028/29 will be announced in the coming months.

Food and Rural Affairs, which animal products will be included in the exploration of method-of-production labelling outlined in the Animal Welfare Strategy, published in December 2025.

I refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Putney, Fleur Anderson, on 26 January 2026, PQ UIN 106592.

Communities and Local Government, whether he has considered introducing lower-interest borrowing facilities for housing associations.

I refer the hon. Member to the Written Ministerial Statement published on 2 July 2025 (HCWS771).

Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to review grant funding levels provided through Homes England, in the context of changes in the level of construction costs and interest rates.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 95055 on 5 December 2025.

Communities and Local Government, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of the level of the current Homes England grant rates on the delivery of new affordable housing in high-cost areas such as Elmbridge by housing associations.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 95055 on 5 December 2025.

Communities and Local Government, whether his Department plans to provide targeted funding to support housing associations in addressing damp and disrepair issues in legacy stock.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 81035 on 20 October 2025.

Innovation and Technology, whether Ofcom has assured itself that generative-AI search services in scope of the Online Safety Act 2023 have adequate user reporting and complaints systems as required by their codes of practice.

AI services that allow users to share content with one another or that search live websites to provide results are regulated under the Online Safety Act.In-scope services are required to assess the risk of harm to users from illegal content on their services and implement measures to mitigate this risk. Where services are likely to be accessed by children, they will also need to risk assess for content harmful to children and take action to protect children from harmful content.Ofcom has a range of robust enforcement powers to ensure compliance with the Act. Ofcom publishes details on the enforcement action it takes on its website.

Innovation and Technology, whether Ofcom has enforced the obligation on in-scope generative-AI search services likely to be accessed by children to carry out a children's risk assessment as required under the Online Safety Act 2023.

AI services that allow users to share content with one another or that search live websites to provide results are regulated under the Online Safety Act.In-scope services are required to assess the risk of harm to users from illegal content on their services and implement measures to mitigate this risk. Where services are likely to be accessed by children, they will also need to risk assess for content harmful to children and take action to protect children from harmful content.Ofcom has a range of robust enforcement powers to ensure compliance with the Act. Ofcom publishes details on the enforcement action it takes on its website.

Innovation and Technology, whether Ofcom has assured itself that generative-AI search services in scope of the Online Safety Act 2023 have adequately resourced content moderation teams as required by their codes of practice.

AI services that allow users to share content with one another or that search live websites to provide results are regulated under the Online Safety Act.In-scope services are required to assess the risk of harm to users from illegal content on their services and implement measures to mitigate this risk. Where services are likely to be accessed by children, they will also need to risk assess for content harmful to children and take action to protect children from harmful content.Ofcom has a range of robust enforcement powers to ensure compliance with the Act. Ofcom publishes details on the enforcement action it takes on its website.

Innovation and Technology, whether Ofcom has enforced the obligation on in-scope generative-AI search services that they carry out child access assessments as required by section 36 of the Online Safety Act 2023.

AI services that allow users to share content with one another or that search live websites to provide results are regulated under the Online Safety Act.In-scope services are required to assess the risk of harm to users from illegal content on their services and implement measures to mitigate this risk. Where services are likely to be accessed by children, they will also need to risk assess for content harmful to children and take action to protect children from harmful content.Ofcom has a range of robust enforcement powers to ensure compliance with the Act. Ofcom publishes details on the enforcement action it takes on its website.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether the Department has assessed trends in global audience reach for state-controlled international broadcasters based in (a) Russia and (b) China over the last 10 years.

Details of funding and audience reach for the BBC World Service are published in the BBC's Annual Report and Accounts, available on the organisation's website. We do not centrally collate the equivalent data for Russian and Chinese state broadcasters.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what was the budget allocation for the BBC World Service in each year from 2015 to 2025 inclusive.

Details of funding and audience reach for the BBC World Service are published in the BBC's Annual Report and Accounts, available on the organisation's website. We do not centrally collate the equivalent data for Russian and Chinese state broadcasters.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what the BBC World Service's global weekly audience figures were from 2015 to 2025 inclusive.

Details of funding and audience reach for the BBC World Service are published in the BBC's Annual Report and Accounts, available on the organisation's website. We do not centrally collate the equivalent data for Russian and Chinese state broadcasters.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps her Department is taking to help ensure (a) transparency and (b) accountability in nutrition spending following its decision to discontinue reporting on the 2021 Nutrition for Growth financial commitment to spend at least £1.5 billion on nutrition objectives from 2022-2030.

Since 2010, the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) has reported on its nutrition-related spend across our Official Development Assistance (ODA). The latest available report captures data up to 2023 and shows that FCDO dispersed over 40 per cent of our 2021 Nutrition for Growth spend pledge during the first two years. FCDO Ministers have decided to move away from a spend focused target and instead focus on a more meaningful results target to better demonstrate the impact achieved through our programme and policy efforts to improve nutrition.FCDO officials are currently working on proposals for a nutrition results target and will share more information on this in due course with the aim to report on nutrition results from 2026. Whilst we will no longer be reporting spend against the 2021 spend target, we do intend to continue to share our nutrition spend data as part of our established accountability mechanisms.

If he will make an assessment of the reasons for which the number of Crown Court sitting days has been below the maximum operational capacity forecast by HM Courts and Tribunals Service since September 2024.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.

If he will make an assessment of the potential impact of holding 111,250 Crown Court sitting days in the 2025-26 financial year on the criminal case backlog.

Operational capacity in the criminal courts does not refer solely to judicial sitting days. Consideration of court capacity necessarily includes consideration of capacity in terms of numbers of advocates, defence and prosecution, legal advisors and other court staff of which there is a finite supply. To fund additional sitting days, the Lord Chancellor needed to be confident that the extra days were both deliverable and affordable.The Crown Court is currently sitting the most sitting days since records began. The previous Lord Chancellor had already funded a significant increase over previous years’ allocations for this year. Having assessed regional delivery performance and confidence across criminal justice partners required for delivery, and considered the Department’s broader financial position, the Lord Chancellor chose to fund a further 1,250 Crown Court sitting days, taking the total to a record 111,250 this financial year.The additional sitting days will be distributed to areas of the country able to support higher sitting levels and will enable the courts to sit at record levels this year, meaning more trials will be able to be heard. New courts and prison projections which include the assumed 111,250 days will be published in December.Whilst the Crown Court sitting days allocation is at a record level, it is not even higher due to capacity constraints and the Department’s wider financial position. This means while we are prioritising Crown Court funding we also have to consider the capacity not just of HMCTS, but the capacity and cost of the judges, lawyers, prosecutors, legal aid and defence barristers that underpin the rest of the system. We do not hold data for the number of cases not heard each month as a result of the cap on sitting days. We consider capacity across the year and have adjusted sitting day levels accordingly, as detailed below.The Lord Chancellor and his officials engage regularly with the Treasury on court resourcing and funding. This increase in sitting days reflects the Government’s commitment to ensuring the Crown Court has the resources it needs to deliver timely justice. This year we have secured record investment in the courts system – up to £450 million by the end of the Spending Review period.While extra sitting days will help to tackle delays in our courts, only major reform will address the crisis in our courts. That is why the previous Lord Chancellor commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to lead an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose bold and ambitious reforms to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.