Written questions by Sultana.

What steps her Department is taking to reduce errors in decision-making in UK Visitor visa applications.

The Home Office has a comprehensive framework in place to support improved decision-making on visit visa applications and to minimise the risk of error.This includes:Robust quality assurance processes, with decisions subject to both first-line checks by managers, random sampling and audit activity, which are supported by marking standards.A structured decision assurance framework, including targeted reviews which assess compliance with guidance and the quality of decision-making.Continuous improvement activity, using feedback to provide targeted support, alongside regular updates to guidance and training for decision-makers.These measures ensure that decisions are made in line with the Immigration Rules and published guidance, and that any identified issues are addressed through feedback, training and ongoing assurance activity.

Whether her Department plans to introduce (a) an independent right of appeal for refused Visitor visa applications and (b) clearer guidance for applicants whose applications are refused, including information on the reasons for refusal and steps that may improve the prospects of a future successful application.

There is no right of appeal against the refusal of a visit visa and there are no plans to introduce one; it was removed by Parliament in June 2013.All applicants who are refused a visit visa are provided with a refusal notice setting out the reasons for the decision. Should an applicant wish to reapply for a visa having been refused, they may make a fresh application, taking care to ensure that they address the concerns raised in the refusal notice, and demonstrate that they now meet the requirements of all the relevant rules - https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-appendix-v-visitor.Comprehensive guidance on the Visitor route is publicly available and is regularly updated to support applicants and decision-makers. The guidance was updated most recently on 25 February 2026, and this document is available on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/visit-guidance.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether Ministers in her Department have met with (a) BP and (b) Shell to discuss Venezuela since January 2026.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided to her party leader on 12 January in response to Question 103190, and I would suggest that she resumes talks with him to coordinate their lines of questioning, and avoid duplicating each other's work.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what discussions were held at the meeting in Caracas on 5 March 2026 with Harriet Thompson, Colin Dick and British natural resource companies.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided to her party leader on 12 January in response to Question 103190, and I would suggest that she resumes talks with him to coordinate their lines of questioning, and avoid duplicating each other's work.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, who was present at the meeting on 24 January 2025 between Baroness Chapman and Shell PLC; and what their job titles were.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided to her party leader on 12 January in response to Question 103190, and I would suggest that she resumes talks with him to coordinate their lines of questioning, and avoid duplicating each other's work.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she plans to relax arms export controls to Argentina.

I refer the Hon Member to the government statement on this subject issued in December 2025, which said: "There are no specific talks with Argentina about the UK relaxing its arms export controls, but more broadly, we look forward to deepening our co-operation with Argentina across areas including trade, science and culture to deliver growth for the British people."

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what discussions were held at the meeting on 24 January 2025 between Baroness Chapman and Shell PLC.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided to her party leader on 12 January in response to Question 103190, and I would suggest that she resumes talks with him to coordinate their lines of questioning, and avoid duplicating each other's work.

With reference to the Government's response to Recommendation 4 of the Work and Pensions Committee's Get Britain Working, Reforming Jobcentres report, how he plans to work with Universal Credit claimants and advice and advocacy organisations to ensure that the claimant commitment pathfinder tests are informed by their insights and experience.

The claimant commitment pathfinder is being developed using direct insight from Universal Credit claimants and work coaches. Through structured user research activity and ongoing feedback, we are assessing how the new approach operates in practice and whether it provides a clearer and improved experience from both a user and operational perspective. This engagement forms part of wider improvements to conditionality and claimant communication set out in the Government’s response to Recommendation 4. We are committed to publishing evaluation findings in line with Government Social Research processes.

With reference to the Government's response to Recommendation 4 of the Work and Pensions Committee's Get Britain Working, Reforming Jobcentres report, against what objectives the claimant commitment pathfinder tests will be evaluated.

Evaluation of the claimant commitment pathfinder will focus on how well the approach enables more tailored conditionality, clearer communication of expectations, and improved engagement between claimants and work coaches. It will also assess claimant understanding of their commitments and whether the approach leads to a better overall experience. These objectives align with the reform testing outlined in response to Recommendation 4 and we are committed to publishing evaluation findings in line with Government Social Research processes.

What steps he is taking to ensure that sanctions are imposed as a last resort and after adequate warning.

Sanctions are only ever applied if a claimant has failed to undertake their agreed requirements without good reason. All requirements are set in discussion with the claimant and tailored to their capability and circumstances, making them realistic and achievable. Requirements are regularly reviewed to ensure that they remain appropriate for every claimant.Our work coaches regularly repeat key messages about the need for a claimant to meet their requirements and what the consequences of not meeting them are. If a claimant has known vulnerabilities, we take them into account and provide additional support where possible.Before a referral is made, a pre-referral quality check is completed as an additional safeguarding measure to check for any claimant vulnerabilities and to review the appropriateness of the activity set.If a referral is made, an independent DWP decision maker will further consider the claimant’s circumstances, whether the work-related requirement was appropriate, the external situation at the time of failure, and any evidence of good reason, before deciding whether a sanction is applicable.

Whether his Department has shared satellite data (a) imagery and (b) video gathered by the Tyche microsatellite with other countries since 2024.

In the interests of operational security of the UK and international partners, we cannot comment on the sharing of data from UK Space Command’s TYCHE satellite with other countries since its launch in August 2024.

How many prosecutions were discontinued due to the expiry of statutory time limits arising from police administrative delay in each of the last five years.

The Home Office publishes official statistics on the number of notifiable offences recorded by the police in England and Wales and their investigative outcomes on a quarterly basis. This includes outcome type 17 “Prosecution time limit expired”, and the requested information can be accessed here:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/police-recorded-crime-and-outcomes-open-data-tables#outcomes-open-dataWhilst some cases may exceed statutory time limits, we expect police forces to follow the Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) and to apply consistent, robust case management practices. This includes ensuring investigations are developed into high quality case files and that decisions are diligently reviewed against evidential and disclosure standards, doing everything possible to avoid the loss of viable prosecutions.When prosecutions fail due to shortcomings in police case management, victims retain formal avenues to seek reassurance and challenge decisions, such as the Victims’ Right to Review (VRR). This allows victims to request an independent reassessment of decisions not to charge or to discontinue proceedings. As part of this process, police undertake a review of the original decision, examining all available evidence and considering whether any further investigative steps or alternative outcomes are possible.The VRR framework provides an important safeguard within the Criminal Justice System by ensuring that decisions are tested against appropriate evidential and public interest standards and that the rationale for those decisions is transparent and robust.It is important to note however, that the VRR process cannot override decisions made where statutory time limits governing the prosecution of the offences apply. Summary only offences, must have a charge laid within six months of the offence date under section 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980. Once this statutory time limit has expired, proceedings cannot lawfully be initiated; as a result the VRR route cannot reinstate any proceedings.In cases involving either way or indictable offences, where no statutory time limit applies, a successful VRR can lead to the reinstatement of proceedings if the review finds that the original decision was not sound.

What recourse is available to victims when prosecutions collapse due to police case management.

The Home Office publishes official statistics on the number of notifiable offences recorded by the police in England and Wales and their investigative outcomes on a quarterly basis. This includes outcome type 17 “Prosecution time limit expired”, and the requested information can be accessed here:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/police-recorded-crime-and-outcomes-open-data-tables#outcomes-open-dataWhilst some cases may exceed statutory time limits, we expect police forces to follow the Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) and to apply consistent, robust case management practices. This includes ensuring investigations are developed into high quality case files and that decisions are diligently reviewed against evidential and disclosure standards, doing everything possible to avoid the loss of viable prosecutions.When prosecutions fail due to shortcomings in police case management, victims retain formal avenues to seek reassurance and challenge decisions, such as the Victims’ Right to Review (VRR). This allows victims to request an independent reassessment of decisions not to charge or to discontinue proceedings. As part of this process, police undertake a review of the original decision, examining all available evidence and considering whether any further investigative steps or alternative outcomes are possible.The VRR framework provides an important safeguard within the Criminal Justice System by ensuring that decisions are tested against appropriate evidential and public interest standards and that the rationale for those decisions is transparent and robust.It is important to note however, that the VRR process cannot override decisions made where statutory time limits governing the prosecution of the offences apply. Summary only offences, must have a charge laid within six months of the offence date under section 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980. Once this statutory time limit has expired, proceedings cannot lawfully be initiated; as a result the VRR route cannot reinstate any proceedings.In cases involving either way or indictable offences, where no statutory time limit applies, a successful VRR can lead to the reinstatement of proceedings if the review finds that the original decision was not sound.

With reference to the Government's response to Recommendation 4 of the Work and Pensions Committee's Get Britain Working, Reforming Jobcentres report, what steps he is taking to monitor the quality and consistency of sanctions pre-referral quality checks.

The Pre-referral Quality Check is completed by a Jobcentre Team Leader, deputy, or colleague with the relevant experience. The Department has a variety of internal performance metrics in place to monitor the quality of our services. We regularly review referrals to ensure they are being delivered consistently and fairly.

What guidance or oversight mechanisms are in place to ensure that police forces do not lose prosecutions due to the expiry of statutory time limits; and whether the Government plans to review safeguards relating to such time limits in cases involving threats of serious violence.

The Home Office publishes official statistics on the number of notifiable offences recorded by the police in England and Wales and their investigative outcomes on a quarterly basis. This includes outcome type 17 “Prosecution time limit expired”, and the requested information can be accessed here:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/police-recorded-crime-and-outcomes-open-data-tables#outcomes-open-dataWhilst some cases may exceed statutory time limits, we expect police forces to follow the Director’s Guidance on Charging (6th edition) and to apply consistent, robust case management practices. This includes ensuring investigations are developed into high quality case files and that decisions are diligently reviewed against evidential and disclosure standards, doing everything possible to avoid the loss of viable prosecutions.When prosecutions fail due to shortcomings in police case management, victims retain formal avenues to seek reassurance and challenge decisions, such as the Victims’ Right to Review (VRR). This allows victims to request an independent reassessment of decisions not to charge or to discontinue proceedings. As part of this process, police undertake a review of the original decision, examining all available evidence and considering whether any further investigative steps or alternative outcomes are possible.The VRR framework provides an important safeguard within the Criminal Justice System by ensuring that decisions are tested against appropriate evidential and public interest standards and that the rationale for those decisions is transparent and robust.It is important to note however, that the VRR process cannot override decisions made where statutory time limits governing the prosecution of the offences apply. Summary only offences, must have a charge laid within six months of the offence date under section 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980. Once this statutory time limit has expired, proceedings cannot lawfully be initiated; as a result the VRR route cannot reinstate any proceedings.In cases involving either way or indictable offences, where no statutory time limit applies, a successful VRR can lead to the reinstatement of proceedings if the review finds that the original decision was not sound.

What consideration he has given to lowering the sanctions daily rate reduction rate to less than 100% of the Universal Credit standard allowance.

Whilst a sanction typically results in a 100% reduction of the Universal Credit standard allowance rate for each day the sanction is in place (except for couples where this is halved), lower reduction rates apply in certain scenarios where it is reasonable due to the claimant’s circumstances, such as if they are aged 16 or 17. If a claimant is entitled to additional elements on top of their standard allowance such as for children or housing costs, they will continue to be paid. To keep the conditionality and sanctions system clear, fair and effective in promoting positive behaviours, we keep our policies and procedures under continuous review.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, how her Department interprets the word facilitate in Article 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty 2015.

We assess our relevant treaty obligations in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, how her Department interprets the word facilitate in Article 7 of the Arms Trade Treaty 2015.

We assess our relevant treaty obligations in accordance with the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Whether the UK has any agreement with the Palestinian authorities to use Palestinian airspace for military purposes.

Yes. The Ministry of Defence has permission from the Palestinian Authority to transit and overfly Palestinian airspace.

Whether the Royal Air Force was granted access to Palestinian airspace to conduct military exercises with fighter jets on 18 and 19 February 2026.

Yes. The aircraft were granted overflight of the relevant Flight Information Regions, as designated by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, under routine Diplomatic Flight Clearance procedures. The Ministry of Defence also had permission from the Palestinian Authority for overflight of Palestinian airspace. RAF aircraft transited Israel and Palestine on 18 and 19 February 2026 to undertake missions related to Operation Shader. Operation Shader is the ongoing RAF contribution to the military intervention against Daesh in Iraq and Syria, beginning in August 2014.