Every parliamentary written question tabled by Stuart Andrew this session, with the full answer and department. Back to the MP page.
Showing 221–240 of 319 · this parliament
What discussions his Department has had with the Motor Neurone Disease Association on patient access to Tofersen.
Department officials recently met with the Motor Neurone Disease Association to discuss a range of issues, including patient access to tofersen.
Whether his Department plans to publish data on the number of patients receiving Tofersen through NHS services.
I am aware that the marketing authorisation holder has established an early access programme (EAP) through which some NHS patients are currently accessing tofersen. This is a company-led EAP and therefore the Department nor NHS England centrally hold prospective information regarding the exact number of patients receiving tofersen.
Food and Rural Affairs, what estimate she has made of the potential economic impact of prohibiting poultry shows on (a) rural economies, (b) agricultural shows, (c) local businesses and (d) hobbyist breeders.
Regulation 6 of the Avian Influenza (Preventive Measures) (England) Regulations 2006, as amended, sets out the legal basis for permitting gatherings (such as shows) of poultry or other captive birds. In England, a licence to hold a bird gathering may be granted by Defra if a veterinary risk assessment has been carried out, and if the gathering, including the movement of birds to and from it, would not significantly increase the risk of the transmission of avian influenza virus. Detailed risk assessments can be found on GOV.UK. Any outbreak of notifiable avian disease has a significant impact on the UK poultry industry, through the trade and impacts on the bird keeper. Together, the Government and bird keepers must do everything we can to keep this disease out of kept bird flocks as there are limited effective actions that can be taken to prevent incursions of the disease through migratory wild birds or transmission between wild bird species.
Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment she has made of the cultural and social contribution of poultry shows to rural communities.
Poultry shows play an important role in the cultural and social life of rural communities. Gatherings of birds, such as poultry shows, are currently individually risk assessed to reduce the risk of further outbreaks of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza. Risk is reviewed regularly to inform the need for such measures.
What his Department’s policy is on the use of minimum waiting times for elective NHS care; and whether he has considered prohibiting the use of such waiting times less than 18 weeks.
As set out in the Plan for Change, we are committed to returning to the NHS constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to consultant-led treatment by March 2029. As of August 2025, the waiting list had reduced by over 206,000 compared to the start of July 2024 despite over 24.5 million referrals onto the list over this period. Performance against the standard for 92% of patients to start first treatment within 18 weeks of referral was 61.0%, 2.7 percentage points higher than a year earlier.There is no formal national policy supporting minimum waits in the National Health Service and no national assessment has been made on the potential impact of minimum waiting. However, the NHS standard contract technical guidance for 2025/26 states that commissioners may choose to include minimum waiting times in Activity Planning Assumptions to ensure delivery of targets within agreed financial allocations. The guidance requires commissioners to consider the equality and quality impacts of their plans on patients and to plan to deliver their wait time targets as set out in the annual Planning Guidance.Improving value for money and ensuring we are using resources in the most effective manner is a priority for this government. This provision was added to support commissioners in managing activity to ensure they can sustainably manage within their budgets alongside the other requirements set out in the operational planning guidance for 2025/26.Integrated care boards (ICBs) hold the responsibility and budget for commissioning and delivering elective activity through providers in their local area, they have discretion to design bespoke services that work best for and meet the needs of their local community. The specific information requested on which NHS ICBs use minimum waiting times for elective care; and for what reasons, is not held by the Department.We will work closely with all systems to ensure they deliver the expected level of improvement in waiting times set out in 2025/26 Planning Guidance.
What assessment he has made of the potential impact of deliberately imposed minimum waiting times for elective care on the NHS’s compliance with its constitutional access standards.
As set out in the Plan for Change, we are committed to returning to the NHS constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to consultant-led treatment by March 2029. As of August 2025, the waiting list had reduced by over 206,000 compared to the start of July 2024 despite over 24.5 million referrals onto the list over this period. Performance against the standard for 92% of patients to start first treatment within 18 weeks of referral was 61.0%, 2.7 percentage points higher than a year earlier.There is no formal national policy supporting minimum waits in the National Health Service and no national assessment has been made on the potential impact of minimum waiting. However, the NHS standard contract technical guidance for 2025/26 states that commissioners may choose to include minimum waiting times in Activity Planning Assumptions to ensure delivery of targets within agreed financial allocations. The guidance requires commissioners to consider the equality and quality impacts of their plans on patients and to plan to deliver their wait time targets as set out in the annual Planning Guidance.Improving value for money and ensuring we are using resources in the most effective manner is a priority for this government. This provision was added to support commissioners in managing activity to ensure they can sustainably manage within their budgets alongside the other requirements set out in the operational planning guidance for 2025/26.Integrated care boards (ICBs) hold the responsibility and budget for commissioning and delivering elective activity through providers in their local area, they have discretion to design bespoke services that work best for and meet the needs of their local community. The specific information requested on which NHS ICBs use minimum waiting times for elective care; and for what reasons, is not held by the Department.We will work closely with all systems to ensure they deliver the expected level of improvement in waiting times set out in 2025/26 Planning Guidance.
Which NHS Integrated Care Boards use minimum waiting times for elective care; and for what reasons.
As set out in the Plan for Change, we are committed to returning to the NHS constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to consultant-led treatment by March 2029. As of August 2025, the waiting list had reduced by over 206,000 compared to the start of July 2024 despite over 24.5 million referrals onto the list over this period. Performance against the standard for 92% of patients to start first treatment within 18 weeks of referral was 61.0%, 2.7 percentage points higher than a year earlier.There is no formal national policy supporting minimum waits in the National Health Service and no national assessment has been made on the potential impact of minimum waiting. However, the NHS standard contract technical guidance for 2025/26 states that commissioners may choose to include minimum waiting times in Activity Planning Assumptions to ensure delivery of targets within agreed financial allocations. The guidance requires commissioners to consider the equality and quality impacts of their plans on patients and to plan to deliver their wait time targets as set out in the annual Planning Guidance.Improving value for money and ensuring we are using resources in the most effective manner is a priority for this government. This provision was added to support commissioners in managing activity to ensure they can sustainably manage within their budgets alongside the other requirements set out in the operational planning guidance for 2025/26.Integrated care boards (ICBs) hold the responsibility and budget for commissioning and delivering elective activity through providers in their local area, they have discretion to design bespoke services that work best for and meet the needs of their local community. The specific information requested on which NHS ICBs use minimum waiting times for elective care; and for what reasons, is not held by the Department.We will work closely with all systems to ensure they deliver the expected level of improvement in waiting times set out in 2025/26 Planning Guidance.
What assessment he has made of the potential impact of minimum waiting times for elective care on patients; and if he will publish clinical advice his Department has received on those waiting times.
As set out in the Plan for Change, we are committed to returning to the NHS constitutional standard that 92% of patients wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to consultant-led treatment by March 2029. As of August 2025, the waiting list had reduced by over 206,000 compared to the start of July 2024 despite over 24.5 million referrals onto the list over this period. Performance against the standard for 92% of patients to start first treatment within 18 weeks of referral was 61.0%, 2.7 percentage points higher than a year earlier.There is no formal national policy supporting minimum waits in the National Health Service and no national assessment has been made on the potential impact of minimum waiting. However, the NHS standard contract technical guidance for 2025/26 states that commissioners may choose to include minimum waiting times in Activity Planning Assumptions to ensure delivery of targets within agreed financial allocations. The guidance requires commissioners to consider the equality and quality impacts of their plans on patients and to plan to deliver their wait time targets as set out in the annual Planning Guidance.Improving value for money and ensuring we are using resources in the most effective manner is a priority for this government. This provision was added to support commissioners in managing activity to ensure they can sustainably manage within their budgets alongside the other requirements set out in the operational planning guidance for 2025/26.Integrated care boards (ICBs) hold the responsibility and budget for commissioning and delivering elective activity through providers in their local area, they have discretion to design bespoke services that work best for and meet the needs of their local community. The specific information requested on which NHS ICBs use minimum waiting times for elective care; and for what reasons, is not held by the Department.We will work closely with all systems to ensure they deliver the expected level of improvement in waiting times set out in 2025/26 Planning Guidance.
When she plans to amend Gift Aid legislation to ensure that charities operating on a membership subscription model can continue to claim Gift Aid while complying with the requirements of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
The government will legislate to amend the rules concerning Gift Aid due to implications of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCCA) 2024. This Act introduces new protections for consumers who take out subscription contracts. The government will amend existing Gift Aid legislation before the DMCCA comes into force so that charities can continue to claim Gift Aid while complying with new consumer protections.
Whether his Department has issued any guidance to Ministers on attendance at public events featuring performers whose past public statements have raised concern among hon. Members.
The Ministerial Code sets out the standards of behaviour expected of ministers. Ministers are personally responsible for deciding how to act and conduct themselves in the light of the Code and for justifying their actions and conduct to Parliament and the public.
Whether he has issued guidance on Ministerial attendance at public events that include performers whose previous public statements have raised concerns about the endorsement of violence.
The Ministerial Code sets out the standards of behaviour expected of ministers. Ministers are personally responsible for deciding how to act and conduct themselves in the light of the Code and for justifying their actions and conduct to Parliament and the public.
Media and Sport, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of Glastonbury Festival including performers whose past public statements have been the subject of concern on public safety and community cohesion.
Decisions on which artists perform at events and festivals are a matter for event organisers, who must take into account any legal considerations, and meet the requirements of their license, in consultation with relevant authorities.We unequivocally condemn threatening remarks made towards any individual. Political intimidation and abuse must have no place in our society. We recognise the chilling effect that harassment and intimidation of elected representatives can have on our democracy. Support for proscribed organisations is wholly unacceptable, with criminal offences set out in the Terrorism Act 2000.
Media and Sport, whether any Ministers in her Department are planning to attend the 2025 Glastonbury Festival in an official capacity.
No, but thanks for asking.
What discussions she has had with the organisers of Glastonbury Festival on the inclusion of Kneecap in the 2025 line-up.
The Government’s responsibility is to provide the police with the necessary resources, powers and clarity over priorities to allow them to do what is required to protect public safety.Subsequent decisions on the investigation and prosecution of criminal offences are a matter for the operationally independent police and Crown Prosecution Service.Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (TACT) makes it an offence to invite support for a proscribed organisation; recklessly express an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation; arrange, manage or assist in arranging or managing a meeting in the knowledge that the meeting is to support or further the activities of a proscribed organisation. Section 13 of TACT also makes it a criminal offence to wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation, and publish an image of an item of clothing or other article, such as a flag or logo.
Media and Sport, what steps her Department is taking to help ensure the (a) independence of, (b) transparency of and (c) public confidence in the inquiry into the appointment of the Chair of the Independent Football Regulator.
The Chair of the Independent Football Regulator is appointed through a fair and open competition, run under the Governance Code on Public Appointments.In addition, the preferred Chair appointment is subject to pre-appointment scrutiny by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Their report, endorsing the preferred candidate, has been published on their website.We look forward to cooperating fully with the Commissioner’s inquiry. The Commissioner is fully independent and reports of its investigations are published on the Commissioner for Public Appointments website.
Media and Sport, what recent discussions she has had with the Home Secretary on the security implications of public performances by artists whose past public statements have been the subject of political or public concern.
Decisions on which artists perform at events and festivals are a matter for event organisers, who must take into account any legal considerations, and meet the requirements of their license, in consultation with relevant authorities.We unequivocally condemn threatening remarks made towards any individual. Political intimidation and abuse must have no place in our society. We recognise the chilling effect that harassment and intimidation of elected representatives can have on our democracy. Support for proscribed organisations is wholly unacceptable, with criminal offences set out in the Terrorism Act 2000.
Media and Sport, whether her Department has published the full (a) criteria and (b) process for the appointment of the Chair of the Independent Football Regulator.
The assessment criteria and process for the appointment of the Chair was advertised on the government appointments website.The Chair is appointed through a fair and open competition, run under the publicly available Governance Code on Public Appointments.In addition, the preferred Chair appointment is subject to pre-appointment scrutiny by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Their report, endorsing the preferred candidate, has been published on their website.As is standard for all public appointments we would not name organisations or individuals in order to protect the confidentiality of the process.
Media and Sport, what discussions her Department has had with Glastonbury Festival organisers on the inclusion of Kneecap in the 2025 line-up.
Decisions on which artists perform at events and festivals are a matter for event organisers, who must take into account any legal considerations, and meet the requirements of their license, in consultation with relevant authorities.We unequivocally condemn threatening remarks made towards any individual. Political intimidation and abuse must have no place in our society. We recognise the chilling effect that harassment and intimidation of elected representatives can have on our democracy. Support for proscribed organisations is wholly unacceptable, with criminal offences set out in the Terrorism Act 2000.
Media and Sport, if she will publish the full findings of any inquiry into the appointment process for the Chair of the Independent Football Regulator.
The Chair of the Independent Football Regulator is appointed through a fair and open competition, run under the Governance Code on Public Appointments.In addition, the preferred Chair appointment is subject to pre-appointment scrutiny by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Their report, endorsing the preferred candidate, has been published on their website.We look forward to cooperating fully with the Commissioner’s inquiry. The Commissioner is fully independent and reports of its investigations are published on the Commissioner for Public Appointments website.
Media and Sport, if she will publish the list of (a) people and (b) organisations consulted during the appointment process for the Chair of the Independent Football Regulator.
The assessment criteria and process for the appointment of the Chair was advertised on the government appointments website.The Chair is appointed through a fair and open competition, run under the publicly available Governance Code on Public Appointments.In addition, the preferred Chair appointment is subject to pre-appointment scrutiny by the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee. Their report, endorsing the preferred candidate, has been published on their website.As is standard for all public appointments we would not name organisations or individuals in order to protect the confidentiality of the process.