{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=1&parliament=4&state=debated","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?parliament=4&state=debated","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=9&parliament=4&state=debated","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=2&parliament=4&state=debated","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"archived-petition","id":638449,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/638449.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Require employers to offer career breaks for parents with a seriously ill child","background":"My daughter was diagnosed with Leukaemia. I became a full-time nurse overnight. My employer is unable to keep my job open so I have lost my job of 19 years. Employers should be required to grant special breaks for parents in this situation enabling them to return to their jobs afterwards.","additional_details":"Parents shouldn’t face losing their jobs on top of dealing with the possibility of losing their child. I feel this is the responsibility of the Government to protect the parents of seriously ill children, with no choice other than to drop everything to care for their children. Please, this needs to be addressed immediately. I have spoken to so many parents with caring responsibilities that are struggling financially, which then becomes a huge emotional burden and all this could be avoided if there was something in place to help desperate parents. This is URGENT!","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":102316,"created_at":"2023-05-21T20:00:34.191Z","updated_at":"2025-11-14T11:12:11.562Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-06-02T15:46:26.613Z","closed_at":"2023-12-02T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-05-21T20:42:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-07-01T17:34:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-07-20T14:37:44.560Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-14T15:02:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-27","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-02-03","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-14T11:12:11.562Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-07-20","summary":"The Government understands the difficulties and worry faced by parents of seriously ill children.  We have no plans to introduce a right to take a career break in these circumstances. ","details":"The Government understands the difficulties, worry and challenges faced by parents with seriously ill children.  While the Government is very sympathetic, it is not practical to provide a specific right to take time away from work to cover every challenging situation an employee may face.\n\nMany employers are already very supportive when people find themselves in these situations,\n\nThe Government currently has no plans to introduce a specific right to take a career break for parents with seriously ill children.\n\nHowever, the Government is supporting legislation which will provide support for parents, including those caring for ill children or facing other difficult circumstances.\n\nThe Government supported the Neonatal Care (leave and pay) Act 2023.  Neonatal Leave and Pay will apply to parents of babies who are admitted into hospital up to the age of 28 days, and who have a continuous stay in hospital of seven full days or more. Eligible employed parents will be able to take up to 12 weeks of paid leave on top of their other parental entitlements such as Maternity and Paternity Leave. Neonatal Leave will be a ‘day one’ right meaning that it will be available to an employee from their first day in a new job. The Act received Royal Assent on the 24 May 2023.  It will provide additional support to parents of seriously ill babies who require neonatal care.\n\nThe Government supported the Employment Relations (Flexible Working) Act. This will increase the number of requests for flexible working an employee can make in a year, reduce the time an employer has to administer a request and require an employer to consult with the employee if they are going to reject the request.  The Government has also committed to take forward regulations to make the right to request flexible working apply from the first day of employment – bringing an estimated additional 2.2 million people into scope.  Flexible working – whether it relates to the hours, timing or place of work – can be an important way for individuals to work in a way that meets both their personal needs, and those of their employer.  For parents of seriously ill children, better access to flexible working arrangements may make it easier for them to manage that situation while remaining in work.  We recognise that there is no ‘one size-fits-all’ approach to flexible working arrangements and that the extent to which flexible working is suitable for individuals will depend on personal and organisational circumstances. It is therefore important that any such arrangements are discussed between employers and employees.\n\nThe Government supported the Carer’s Leave Act 2023.  This Act will create a new entitlement to carer’s leave from an employee’s first day of work.  It will be available to all employees who are providing care for a dependant with a long-term care need. Eligible employees will be entitled to one week of unpaid leave per year, which will be available to take flexibly in individual or half days. Whilst not being a right to a career break, Carer’s Leave could provide parents of seriously ill children with more flexibility to be away from work and make the difficult situation they are facing a little easier.\n\nThe Government believes this is a comprehensive package of new legislation which will greatly help people in a range of circumstances, including those parents of seriously ill children.  It also respects the needs of employers and ensures the burdens on them are the minimum necessary.\n\nIn addition to these new rights, parents are also already entitled to emergency time off for dependents and unpaid parental leave up to their child’s 18th birthday.\n\nNonetheless, we would encourage employers to go further and consider what compassionate leave policies, flexible working arrangements and supportive work environment they may be able to offer beyond that required by legislation alone.  The Government expects employers to treat their staff well and fairly.\n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2023-07-20T14:37:44.558Z","updated_at":"2023-07-26T10:26:48.555Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-02-03","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-02-03/debates/A4B4492E-1B98-4A93-A678-9A8BCDE0F04C/CareerBreaksParentsOfSeriouslyIllChildren","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/6Vwk9YTWQpQ?si=RshNylzTFvUgbAB2","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0024/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":657935,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/657935.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Increase investment in Speech and Language Therapy.","background":"We want the Government to increase investment in speech and language therapy so people of all ages - babies, children and young people, and adults - with communication and/or swallowing needs can get the support they and their families need.","additional_details":"Thousands of people across the country with communication and/or swallowing needs require timely access to speech and language therapy.\r\n \r\nBut for too long, there has not been enough funding for speech and language therapy services. Nor has the current and future speech and language therapy workforce been properly planned for.\r\n \r\nWe are calling on the Government to increase investment in speech and language therapy, so people can get the support they and their families need.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":13188,"created_at":"2024-02-25T13:36:47.187Z","updated_at":"2025-01-28T12:49:02.343Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-03-05T09:38:54.802Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-02-25T14:05:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-03-20T21:31:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-04-18T11:03:22.777Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-27","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-01-27","debate_outcome_at":"2025-01-28T12:49:02.343Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-04-18","summary":"This government has increased investment in the NHS since 2019 in real terms. Systems are developing plans to reduce waits and we are committed to growing the Speech and Language Therapy workforce.","details":"We recognise the impact that long waits to access speech and language therapy can have on the individual, their families and carers. Demand has been rising for speech and language therapies. The most recent data shows, as of February 2024, 72,661 children and 20,648 adults were waiting for Speech and Language Therapy.\n\nAddressing waiting times for community health services, including Speech and Language Therapy, is a priority for the NHS and this Government. Published on 27 March 2024, the NHS England 2024/25 priorities and operational planning guidance asked local systems to develop a comprehensive plan by June 2024 to reduce the overall waiting times for community services. This includes reducing waits over 52 weeks for children’s community services. NHS England will work with Integrated Care Boards and providers of these services to set a specific ambition and improve data capture. NHS England is also working to understand what more can be done to reduce waits for Speech and Language Therapy.\n\nNHS England continues to monitor community services’ waiting lists. Data is published monthly on NHS England’s website: https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/community-health-services-waiting-lists/ \n\nWorkforce is cited as a limiting factor in delivering additional speech and language therapy. The number of therapists working in the NHS in England has increased in recent years, but we recognise the need to improve access to therapies, including Speech and Language Therapies. That is why we are undertaking the biggest nursing, midwifery, and Allied Health Professional recruitment drive in decades. This includes the recruitment of Speech and Language Therapists. The NHS Long Term Workforce Plan sets out an ambition to increase Allied Health Professional training places by 25% to over 18,800 by 2031/32. NHS England has committed to refreshing the modelling that underpins the Long Term Workforce Plan every two years or in line with fiscal events.\n\nSince September 2020, all eligible nursing, midwifery, and allied health profession students have received a non-repayable training grant of a minimum of £5,000 per academic year.\n\nWe are working closely with the Department for Education (DfE) to ensure that children and young people with Special Educational Need and Disabilities (SEND) receive the right support, in the right place, at the right time. We are working together to implement the SEND and Alternative Provision Improvement Plan, which was published on 2 March 2023. This sets out the government’s mission to establish a single national system that delivers for every child and young person with SEND and in alternative provision so that they enjoy their childhood, achieve good outcomes, and are well prepared for adulthood and employment.\n\nWe are taking a joint approach to SEND workforce planning in recognition of the demand for specialist support and have established a steering group to oversee this work aiming to complete it by 2025. To establish the evidence base, we published a research specification paper on 9 January 2024, ‘Demand for therapists for children and young people with SEND’, through the National Institute for Health and Care Research, to help understand the gaps between the supply of therapies and the demand for therapy in children and young people with SEND. \n\nWe will improve access to Speech and Language Therapy by including the ‘Early Language and Support for Every Child’ (ELSEC) pathfinder project within DfE’s £70 million Change Programme in partnership with NHS England. This programme will fund innovative workforce models to identify and support children and young people with speech, language and communication needs at an early stage. Furthermore, DHSC, DfE and NHS England have launched ‘Partnerships for Inclusion of Neurodiversity in Schools’ (PINS), with £13 million of funding to test ideas that will improve access to specialist support in mainstream primary schools.\n\nWe are investing £164.9 billion a year by the end of this Parliament into the NHS. Compared to 2019-20, that is an increase of 13% in real terms. Across England, community health services are locally commissioned to enable systems to best meet the needs of their communities. NHS England is responsible for determining allocations of financial resources to ICBs from April 2023. The allocations process uses a statistical formula to make geographic distribution of financial resources fair and objective, so that it more clearly reflects local healthcare need and helps to reduce health inequalities. This process is independent of Government, and NHS England takes advice on the underlying formula from the independent Advisory Committee on Resource Allocation. NHS England is continuing to work with ICBs to develop their financial plans for 2024/25.  \n\nThis Government is committed to cutting waiting lists and growing the workforce to help people and their families get the support they need.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2024-04-18T11:03:22.775Z","updated_at":"2024-04-18T11:03:22.775Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-01-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-01-27/debates/ABB8BCA7-29DF-4830-ADEE-27E18B0ED23D/SpeechAndLanguageTherapy","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/0b37204e-ec9e-41cc-844c-0fc47a9283ee?in=16:30:11","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0010/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":652602,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/652602.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Don’t increase the income requirement for family visas to £38,700","background":"Currently the financial requirements to bring your spouse to the UK is £18,600 per year and now the Government wants to more than double it. Most people in the UK don’t make that per year. We believe this policy punishes those who fall in love with someone with a different nationality.","additional_details":"Most people in the UK don’t make £38,700 per year and now may face the choice of a lifetime without their partner or leaving their own country because they fell in love and can’t meet the financial requirement for the family visa.\r\n \r\nWe believe it's inhumane for the Government to do this to British citizens and others entitled to family visas, and that this policy is punishing people for failing in love with someone who has a different nationality.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":101321,"created_at":"2023-12-04T18:44:25.454Z","updated_at":"2025-01-24T16:32:25.463Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-12-13T10:19:56.792Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-12-04T18:49:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-12-16T16:41:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-01-10T16:25:27.578Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-24T21:38:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-27","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-01-20","debate_outcome_at":"2025-01-24T16:32:25.447Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-01-10","summary":"The Government intends to raise the MIR in line with the general salary threshold for skilled workers, but will do so in stages to provide predictability for families, starting in spring 2024.","details":"The minimum income requirement (MIR) was introduced in July 2012 to ensure family migrants could be supported at a reasonable level, so they do not unreasonably become a burden on the British taxpayer, and to help ensure they can participate sufficiently in everyday life to facilitate their integration into British society. The MIR has not been increased in line with inflation or real wages since its introduction, or been adjusted in light of the rising numbers of migrants using the route.\n\nThe Home Secretary, in his announcement to Parliament on 4 December 2023, made clear that the intention is to bring the MIR in line with the new minimum general salary threshold for skilled workers, £38,700. This will ensure people only bring dependants to the UK they can support financially and will apply to all British and settled sponsors under the five-year partner route to settlement.\n\nIn spring 2024, we will raise the minimum income threshold for family visas to £29,000, that is the 25th percentile of earnings for jobs which are eligible for skilled worker visas. We will incrementally increase the threshold, moving to the 40th percentile (currently £34,500), and finally to the 50th percentile (currently £38,700, and the level at which the general skilled worker threshold is set) by early 2025.\n\nThere will no longer be a separate child element to the MIR, to ensure British nationals are not treated less favourably than migrants who are required to meet the general skilled worker threshold as a flat rate, regardless of any child being sponsored. Other aspects of the MIR will remain unchanged, such as the various ways in which it can be met and the consideration of exceptional circumstances where it may not be met.\n\nThis change will not be applied retrospectively to people already on the five-year partner route. Those who already have a family visa within the five-year partner route, or who apply before the minimum income threshold is raised, will continue to have their applications assessed against the current income requirement and will not be required to meet the increased threshold. This will also be the case for children seeking to join or accompany parents. \n\nAnyone granted a fiancé(e) visa before the minimum income threshold is raised will also be assessed against the current income requirement when they apply for a family visa within the five-year partner route. Those already in the UK on a different route, who apply to switch into the five-year partner route after the minimum income requirement has been increased, will be subject to the new income requirement.\nThe Government will publish an Equality Impact Assessment on this change in due course.\n\nA fact sheet and an impact assessment can be found on the GOV.UK website using the following links: \n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/news/fact-sheet-on-net-migration-measures-further-detail and \n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-migration-statement-estimated-immigration-impacts \n\nWe keep all of our policies under review with regards to the impact on net migration, families and equalities.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2024-01-10T16:25:27.575Z","updated_at":"2024-01-10T16:25:27.575Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-01-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-01-20/debates/324BC884-717B-44A6-A7A9-1B55049C1FDC/FamilyVisasIncomeRequirement#:~:text=The%20income%20threshold%20remained%20at,them%20with%20long%2Dterm%20care.","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/08ec3417-9ac7-46d6-9e70-2bba34da6e0e","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06724/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":661407,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/661407.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Give parents/guardians a right to access social media accounts of their children","background":"I want parents/guardians to have the right to be given access to their children's social media accounts, by social media providers, both when the child is alive and if they are deceased.","additional_details":"My son Jools was 14 when he took his life in 2022. At the time the new Coroner's powers to request social media access were not in force. However, I also think this is too late.\r\n \r\nSince my son's death, I have not been able to access information to see what my son was looking at that could have contributed to him taking his own life.\r\n \r\nParents should have the right to full access to their child's social media accounts either whilst they are still alive (to protect them) or if they die as in my case.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":126033,"created_at":"2024-04-27T09:12:21.273Z","updated_at":"2025-01-15T16:11:49.632Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-05-10T15:57:56.135Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-04-27T09:55:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-23T14:12:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-08-20T14:01:27.928Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-28T16:14:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-27","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-01-13","debate_outcome_at":"2025-01-15T16:11:49.632Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-08-20","summary":"The Government is committed to tackling the harm children face online and we will look at how we can support families to see information about a child’s internet use following a bereavement.","details":"I would like to thank all those who signed the petition on this incredibly important issue. Every death is a tragedy but extremely so when it involves a young person, and I am grateful to the brave parents who continue to fight for greater protections for children online.\n\nChildren face significant harm online and the Government is committed to finding ways in which we can strengthen protections for children and support those families who have had to endure unimaginable losses. We understand that families want answers and to be able to access information about a child’s internet use following a bereavement, and it is crucial that companies respond to parents’ requests for information in a humane and transparent way.\n\nThe Online Safety Act 2023 contains several provisions which will address some of the challenges faced by parents and coroners when trying to access information from online services about a child’s activities prior to their death.\n\nFirstly, the Act introduces measures to strengthen coroners’ ability to obtain information from online services, providing a route for the parents or guardians to see data in relation to a deceased child. These measures give Ofcom the power to require information from regulated services about a deceased child’s online activity following a request from a coroner. This includes content the child had viewed or with which they had engaged, the role algorithms and other functionalities played and any content that the child generated, uploaded or shared on the service. Where a company refuses to provide information requested by Ofcom, companies may be subject to enforcement action.\n\nSecondly, the Act will ensure services categorised as Category 1 (major user-to-user services, such as the largest social media companies), Category 2A (major search services) or Category 2B (other categorised user-to-user services) are transparent about their policies regarding data disclosure concerning a deceased child. These services will have to set out policies on disclosing information to parents regarding the online activities of a deceased child in a clear, accessible and sufficiently detailed format in their terms of service. They must provide a written response to data requests in a timely manner and must provide a dedicated helpline, or similar means, for parents to communicate with the company to streamline the data request process. They will also be required to offer options for parents to complain when they consider a platform has not met its obligations.\n\nWe know that, in some instances, social media companies' routine processes may erase or delete data that is later required by coroners as part of an investigation into a child’s death. To address this, the new Digital Information and Smart Data Bill will establish a data preservation notice process. This would require Ofcom, on notification from a coroner, to issue a notice to specified services requiring them to retain relevant data they may have on a child which could later be required in an inquest.\n\nThe Online Safety Act does not include any measures which enable parents to access the data of a living child. Social media companies with processes in place that grant parents access to a living child’s data will need to ensure that they comply with UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018. While data protection legislation does not apply to a deceased persons’ data, social media companies must still consider whether any personal data relating to third parties, such as other children that child has interacted with, is captured by a parent’s request for access, as this personal data will also be protected under UK GDPR and DPA 2018.\n\nHowever, there are a range of parental control tools which give parents greater oversight of their child’s online activity. These tools enable parents to restrict child access to pre-approved sites, manage their privacy and messaging settings, and block or filter inappropriate content or websites.\n\nIn addition, the Online Safety Act ensures that all children will receive a far greater level of protection online. All in-scope services will need to take robust steps to protect children from illegal content and criminal behaviour, including by removing and limiting the spread of such content and taking steps to prevent it from appearing. Additionally, services which are likely to be accessed by children will be required to take steps to protect children from content that is legal but nevertheless harmful to them, including violent content, content that encourages suicide or self-harm, and content that encourages participation in dangerous stunts or challenges.\n\nThe Government is working closely with Ofcom to ensure the Online Safety Act is implemented as quickly, and effectively, as possible. We will continue to work with stakeholders to balance important considerations regarding the safety and privacy of children, and will continue our dialogue with bereaved parents to put their concerns at the heart of our work.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2024-08-20T14:01:27.922Z","updated_at":"2024-08-20T14:01:27.922Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-01-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-01-13/debates/BE75FBD7-CA64-4944-AA56-913BD13AD2AC/Children%E2%80%99SSocialMediaAccounts","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/RMUGxnySoPI","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0182/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":652949,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/652949.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Immediately revoke all licences for arms exports to Israel","background":"The UK is complicit in arming Israel, and many regard Israel to be committing war crimes. ","additional_details":"Palestinian children have been made orphans, people have been crushed by buildings in airstrikes, and there have been many other tragedies. Arms that have been partly manufactured in the UK appear to be being used in the current military action in Gaza.\r\n\r\nWe believe the UK Government is on the wrong side of history, and must stop the sale of arms to Israel.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":107316,"created_at":"2023-12-09T07:31:24.011Z","updated_at":"2024-12-17T10:56:43.872Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-12-21T15:00:24.422Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-12-09T15:10:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-02-13T08:36:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-03-05T14:16:21.140Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-29T22:24:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-15","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-16","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-17T10:56:43.851Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-03-05","summary":"HM Government takes its export control responsibilities very seriously and rigorously assesses every application on a case-by-case basis against the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria.","details":"HM Government takes its export control responsibilities very seriously and we operate one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world. This is an important lever for promoting both UK prosperity and national and global security.\n\nWe rigorously assess every application on a case-by-case basis against strict assessment criteria, the Strategic Export Licensing Criteria (the SELC).\n\nThe SELC provide a thorough risk assessment framework for export licence applications and require us to think hard about the impact of providing equipment and its capabilities. We will not license the export of equipment where to do so would be inconsistent with the SELC.  These are not decisions we take lightly.\n\nWe consider a range of factors, including examining the political and security conditions in the destination country, the nature of the equipment to be exported, the organisation or unit which will ultimately be the user of the equipment, and all available information about how similar equipment has been used in the past and how it is likely to be used in the future.\n\nThe Government supports Israel’s right to defend itself against Hamas, but Israel must comply with International Humanitarian Law (IHL).\n\nThe Government continues to monitor the situation closely, and we keep all export licences under continual review. If necessary, we will take action to amend, suspend or revoke licences, in line with the SELC, if circumstances require.\n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2024-03-05T14:16:21.136Z","updated_at":"2024-03-05T14:16:21.136Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-12-16/debates/492BAC22-4E2D-459E-8D41-DF13826FA7FE/IsraelAndPalestine","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yQUOmyRN_SE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9964/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":653509,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/653509.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"For the United Kingdom to recognise the state of Palestine immediately","background":"We believe that the Government needs to recognise the state of Palestine immediately. Otherwise we don't think they can legitimately say they back a two-state solution.","additional_details":"Because we want the people of Palestine to know we see them, recognise their struggle and take responsibility for our part in it.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":283669,"created_at":"2023-12-19T20:58:39.862Z","updated_at":"2024-12-17T10:54:45.494Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-01-04T18:01:21.312Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-12-19T22:34:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-02-06T18:27:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-02-27T16:36:36.944Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-28T17:01:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-15","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-16","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-17T10:54:45.494Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-02-27","summary":"We must give Palestinians a credible political pathway and irreversible momentum towards the establishment of Palestine. We will recognise a Palestinian State when most conducive to the peace process.","details":"The UK unequivocally supports a two-state solution, one that guarantees security and stability for both the Israeli and Palestinian people.\n\nWe have also been clear that must give the people of the West Bank and Gaza the political perspective of a credible route to a Palestinian state and a new future, and that this needs to be irreversible. This is not entirely in our gift, but Britain and our partners can help by confirming our commitment to a sovereign, viable Palestinian state, and our vision for its composition. Crucially, we must state our clear intention to grant it recognition, including at the United Nations. As the Foreign Secretary has said, that can’t come at the start of the process, but neither does it have to be at the very end. Our long-standing position has been that we will recognise a Palestinian State at a time that is most conducive to the peace process.\n\nThe Palestinian Authority has an important long-term role to play in achieving this goal, and so we must work with our allies to provide serious, practical and enduring support needed to bolster the Palestinian Authority. We already provide technical and practical support and are ready to do more. But the Palestinian Authority also must take much needed steps on reform, including setting out a pathway to democratic progress.\n\nAs a priority, we want to see an end to the fighting in Gaza as soon as possible. This is why we are calling for an immediate pause to get aid in and hostages out, then progress towards a sustainable, permanent ceasefire, without a return to destruction, fighting and loss of life. The formation of a new Palestinian Government for the West Bank and Gaza, accompanied by an international support package, and a political horizon which provides a credible and irreversible pathway towards a two-state solution, are two vital steps to achieve this. In parallel we need to see the release of all hostages; Hamas’s capacity to launch attacks against Israel removed; and Hamas no longer being in charge of Gaza.\n\nThe Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have reiterated these messages with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other senior Israeli political leaders, including during the Foreign Secretary’s visit to Israel on 24th  January. They have also raised these points with leaders in Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon in recent weeks.\n\nWe recognise that we need to generate momentum now towards a permanent peace, and that the international community will need to make a massive effort to deliver a reconstruction plan for Gaza. That is why we are pressing for a Contact Group, bringing together the key players, to be set up at once. The UK remains firmly committed to working with our key partners to secure an immediate pause in fighting, make progress towards a sustainable ceasefire, and build momentum towards a long-term political solution.\n\nForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office","created_at":"2024-02-27T16:36:36.942Z","updated_at":"2024-02-27T16:38:53.305Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-12-16/debates/492BAC22-4E2D-459E-8D41-DF13826FA7FE/IsraelAndPalestine","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yQUOmyRN_SE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10085/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":639319,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/639319.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public","background":"Purchasing and owning fireworks should not be allowed for the general public. The Government should introduce a law stating that fireworks should only be permitted for professional shows and events - this will mean they are handled safely, cleanly, and at predictable times.","additional_details":"The negatives of fireworks outweigh the positives. Every year fireworks do the following: \r\n\r\n- Stress out animals, often to point of causing death \r\n- Trigger people with PTSD and trauma (e.g. soldiers)\r\n- Harm those with sensory issues, due to the unpredictable noise\r\n- Cause litter that is then left to rot\r\n- Flood our already stretched A&Es with unnecessary injuries\r\n\r\nI understand that they look pretty, however they do more damage than good. Pro shows enable people to still enjoy them, just considerately.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":50288,"created_at":"2023-06-09T16:31:29.009Z","updated_at":"2024-12-10T12:47:02.422Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-06-15T07:19:52.770Z","closed_at":"2023-12-15T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-06-12T17:49:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-21T18:59:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-11-01T16:11:08.835Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-15","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-09","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-10T12:47:02.422Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-11-01","summary":"The Government has no plans to ban the sale of fireworks to the public but continues to monitor the situation. We believe the majority of individuals use fireworks safely and appropriately.","details":"The Government understands that people want to enjoy fireworks. We believe that the legislative framework controlling fireworks strikes the right balance and we have no plans to replace it at this time. \n\nThe Government's intention has always been to minimise any negative impact of fireworks and we support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused. Local authorities and the police also have powers to tackle anti-social behaviour caused by the misuse of fireworks. It is for local areas to decide how best to deploy these powers, based on their specific circumstances. Whilst there is no evidence to suggest that there is a widespread issue with unsafe or illegal fireworks being used in the UK, the Government continues to work with the Health and Safety Executive and local authorities, including Border Force and Trading Standards, to take action against anyone who imports or sells fireworks illegally in the UK.\n\nExisting legislation controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine. Lower noise fireworks are commercially available to consumers to purchase if they wish to, potentially reducing any distress to vulnerable groups and animals.\n\nA number of animal welfare and veterinary organisations also provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare. We are working closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.\n\nIndividuals should always read the instructions on a firework before use, to ensure that they are aware of how to use the firework safely, reducing the risk of an accident or injury. In addition, fireworks should always be disposed of responsibly by ensuring they are out, soaking them in water overnight, then putting them in the appropriate bin. Guidance on safe use and disposal is widely available from various sources, including on Gov.uk. \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2023-11-01T16:11:08.833Z","updated_at":"2023-11-01T16:11:29.902Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-09","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-12-09/debates/CCC2EF11-D537-40A7-9D1F-3451071819B5/details","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/8dd62bdb-8421-47f7-9db6-efd1f5c07fde","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0152/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":636718,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/636718.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Record the number of bereaved children to ensure they are supported","background":"Aged 12, I experienced my dad’s murder. I received no help until my 20s. Recording the number of children in the household when a death is registered, could help thousands of bereaved children and ensure services can better plan, reach out to families and offer much needed support.","additional_details":"We don't know how many bereaved children there are in the UK right now. If we don’t know the true scale of childhood bereavement, the services that exist to help are unable to proactively offer the support that children and their families need to cope with their grief. Without support, unresolved grief in young people can lead to an increased risk of youth offending, family breakdown, underachievement in education and employment and long-term mental health conditions.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11424,"created_at":"2023-04-16T09:48:39.331Z","updated_at":"2024-12-04T16:32:37.472Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-05-02T16:38:25.837Z","closed_at":"2023-11-02T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-04-17T09:30:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-08-02T11:52:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-10-12T13:48:54.175Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-02","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-03T10:47:22.447Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-10-12","summary":"Losing a loved one is an awful experience, particularly for children. It is not appropriate for a death registration to include the name of any dependent child, but support is available for children.","details":"Losing a loved one is an awful experience for anyone, particularly for a child who loses a parent. As a government, we recognise the profound impact that bereavement can have on a child's life, with far-reaching consequences that may affect their mental health, wellbeing, and academic performance requiring additional support. \n\nThe Government is always looking at how we can improve support for children who need it, including for bereaved children. \n\nThe Department of Health & Social Care lead on the nation’s health, including that of young people. Some bereaved children and young people will require support for their mental health, and we are expanding specialist mental health support by investing an additional £2.3billion a year into mental health services by 2023/24. We are also introducing Mental Health Support Teams in schools and colleges across the country. Mental wellbeing is also a topic in statutory health education and includes a range of content relevant to dealing with bereavement, including teaching pupils how to recognise and talk about their emotions. \n\nWe also know that schools can play a vital role in supporting bereaved children and signposting them to further support. The support provided by Government is complemented by the tremendous work of charities and organisations who are often best placed to provide the expert support needed, and we will continue to work closely with the voluntary sector to assess how we can provide further support to children. \n\nWe strongly encourage anyone struggling with their bereavement to contact their GP who can help provide support, signpost to specialist bereavement support organisations or refer to a counsellor.\n\nOne of the most important ways we can support bereaved children is through providing early help that provides a comprehensive range of effective, evidence-based services to support any child, young person or family that needs it. Government has taken a number of actions to prioritise services, including providing over £45m of additional funding to pathfind Family Help (as part of our ambitious plans to reform children’s social care) and investing over £300 million to establish Family Hubs (with the majority having opened by this summer) and transform ‘Start for Life’ services in 75 Local Authorities. Local Authorities are expected to identify emerging problems and potential unmet needs of individual children and families in their area.\n\nResponsibility for recording deaths sits within HM Passport Office, and is overseen by the General Register Office. The purpose of a death registration is to record information about the deceased person and officially record their cause of death.  It would not be appropriate for the use of a death registration to include the name of any dependent child on the death of a parent. This information would be retained indefinitely and then be available to anyone purchasing a certificate. Once a death is registered, certified copies of the entry can be obtained by anyone who can provide sufficient information to identify the entry and pay the required fee. There are therefore no current plans to change the law in this respect.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-10-12T13:48:54.172Z","updated_at":"2023-10-12T13:48:54.172Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-12-02/debates/9be99746-045d-40f5-9c8c-625e2e5d12a1/WestminsterHall","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/7f494f98-e2ed-463c-9e06-7efdd0a1ab6f","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0166/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":624185,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/624185.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Add content on death, dying and bereavement to the national curriculum","background":"Schools should be required to provide age-appropriate education to help children understand death as a part of life, as part of compulsory Relationships education. On average 111 children in the UK lose a parent every day.","additional_details":"Talking about death can be helpful for children and issues of bereavement should be compulsory learning for children in preparation for life as an adult. Children are taught how life begins through the national curriculum and similarly we should not hide from equipping children the skills to comprehend death. Children must be provided with the skills to comprehend loss and to prepare for the emotions and feelings that accompany a bereavement which at some point, we all have to face.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11322,"created_at":"2022-09-30T13:21:20.340Z","updated_at":"2024-12-04T16:32:55.820Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-10-10T11:01:40.948Z","closed_at":"2023-04-10T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-10-04T10:17:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-02-18T08:25:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-03-14T13:29:21.888Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-12-02","debate_outcome_at":"2024-12-03T10:45:59.000Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-03-13","summary":"Bereavement can be taught about as part of relationships and health education in an age-appropriate way. When we review the statutory guidance, we will assess whether content on bereavement is needed.","details":"We know that experiencing bereavement at a young age can have a significant impact on a child and that schools have a role to play to help children deal with the emotional impact of such a loss. \n\nThrough compulsory relationships and health education, pupils are taught about families and people who care for them and how to recognise healthy and unhealthy relationships.  In health education pupils are taught about mental wellbeing and physical health, with a view to giving them the information they need to make good decisions about their own health and wellbeing, recognise issues in themselves and others and, when issues arise, seek support as early as possible from appropriate sources.\n\nThe Relationships, Sex and Health Education (RSHE) statutory guidance makes clear that teachers should be aware of common adverse childhood experiences, including bereavement, and understand when and how these may be affecting any of their pupils. \n\nThis will help teachers to tailor their lessons accordingly, taking decisions on appropriate resources and support to enable them to teach the curriculum effectively.\n\nThe Department for Education (DfE) is undertaking the first review of the RSHE statutory guidance and will consider the points made by this petition. As part of the review process, the DfE will undertake a public consultation. Respondents will be able to comment on the proposed changes and to propose additional changes for consideration. \n\nDetails of the consultation for the review of the RSHE curriculum will be published on the GOV.UK website \n\nIt is important to acknowledge that staff in schools are not mental health, bereavement or trauma specialists. However, they are well placed to observe children day-to-day and identify those whose behaviour suggests that they may be going through a difficult time. \n\nTo support schools  to respond effectively, the Department is offering a grant of £1,200 to all state schools and colleges in England to train a senior mental health lead who can put in place an effective approach to mental health and wellbeing Senior mental health leads can support staff training. \n\nAs part of the help we offered in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we provided a list of resources for schools to draw on in supporting pupils’ mental health and wellbeing.  This list includes signposting the Childhood Bereavement Network, Hope Again and resources from the Anna Freud Centre on supporting children dealing with loss and bereavement. \n\nThe DfE continues to work closely with the Department for Health and Social Care (DHSC) around issues of children and young people’s mental health and how to provide support to pupils as early as possible.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-03-14T13:29:21.885Z","updated_at":"2023-03-14T13:29:21.885Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-12-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-12-02/debates/9be99746-045d-40f5-9c8c-625e2e5d12a1/WestminsterHall","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/7f494f98-e2ed-463c-9e06-7efdd0a1ab6f","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0166/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":658365,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/658365.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Allow students to be taken out of school for two weeks a year without penalty","background":"Families face school fines for taking their children out of school to go on affordable holidays. This can be a particular issue for low-income families, and families with children that have additional needs, who want or need to avoid busier and more expensive periods.","additional_details":"I feel these families are being discriminated against as they may not find it possible to travel outside of term time, as it could be too costly or overwhelming, with travel, queues, noise, busy airports, busy public transport, busy resorts etc.\r\n \r\nWe think it's unfair that these families and children might not be able to go on holiday because they can't take time off during term time. Parents may also have additional needs that would make travelling at busy times difficult.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":254530,"created_at":"2024-03-03T12:58:27.717Z","updated_at":"2024-12-17T10:56:48.243Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-03-15T11:31:18.430Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-03-03T13:42:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-04-25T13:49:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-05-09T15:27:43.099Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-04-26T21:53:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-11-25","debate_outcome_at":"2024-11-26T14:29:41.170Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-05-09","summary":"Regular school attendance is vital for attainment, wellbeing and development.  We are clear pupils should not miss school for term-time holidays, which cause disruption to teachers and other pupils.","details":"We sympathise with families who wish to avoid busier and more expensive periods, but the Government is clear that pupils should not miss school for term-time holidays. Whilst holidays can be enriching activities, regular school absence disrupts learning for everyone, and the school year is structured in such a way as to provide plenty of time for holidays outside of term-time. Schools also have considerable flexibility to plan term dates themselves, and hold inset days and other occasional days at less busy times of the year which can help families to plan family breaks at times that suit them.\n\nParents who have registered their child at a school have a legal responsibility to ensure they attend regularly. Regular attendance is vital for children’s attainment, mental wellbeing and long-term development, and taking them out of school can damage their education. Children inevitably miss some school due to childhood illnesses. Based on last year’s attendance data, a child who is taken out of school for a two-week holiday every year who also has an average number of days off for sickness and medical appointments, will have missed the equivalent of a full year of school by the time they finish year 11 at age 16. Absences for term-time holidays also cause unnecessary disruption to learning, making it more difficult for teachers to plan lessons and cover the curriculum, which is also disruptive for the other pupils in the class. If every child were to be taken out of school for two weeks, this would have significant consequences for teachers and for other children.\n\nImproving school attendance is one of the Secretary of State for Education’s top priorities, The Government has a comprehensive support-first strategy in place to do this. This includes:\n-   Updated attendance guidance with clear expectations about how schools, trusts and local authorities should work together, including with pupils and families, to support each pupil’s individual needs, particularly those with special educational needs and disabilities and mental ill health;\n-   An attendance data tool allowing early identification and intervention of pupils at risk of persistent absence;\n-   The Attendance Action Alliance of system leaders working to remove barriers to attendance\n-   A new national Attendance Ambassador to work with school leaders to champion attendance;\n-   Expert Attendance Advisers to support local authorities and school trusts and Attendance Hubs to support nearly 2,000 schools;\n-   And an Attendance Mentor pilot which is expanding from 5 to 15 areas from September to reach 10,000 children.\n\nHowever, where support is not working, is not engaged with, or (as in the case of term-time holidays) is not appropriate, it is right that the law is in place to protect children’s right to education. From 19th August, our new National Framework will end the current postcode lottery by introducing a common threshold for considering a penalty notice of 10 sessions of unauthorised absence (equivalent to 5 days) within a 10-school-week period.  For cases other than holiday, there is an expectation that attendance support will have already been provided. Local authorities retain the discretion to issue a penalty notice below the threshold of 10 sessions where it is deemed appropriate. It is up to them and the school to decide on the best course of action based on the circumstances of the individual case and what is most likely to improve attendance.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2024-05-09T15:27:43.096Z","updated_at":"2024-05-09T15:28:59.268Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-11-25","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-11-25/debates/E020704C-3D04-42C3-BE3C-1CA4AF483EC3/HolidaysInSchoolTermTime","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/tUEdI_h3Hns","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0159/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-holidays-term-time/index.html"},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":631412,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/631412.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Offer healthcare workers on tier2 visa ILR after 2 years instead of 5 years","background":"Healthcare workers are meant to have lived in the UK for at least 5 years before they can apply for ILR. With the work they do and the demand for their skills world wide, they deserve to get residency status much quicker. Most healthcare workers are working under extreme pressure in the UK.","additional_details":"Many countries offer immediate residency status for occupations that are in high demand or extremely short. The UK has been a destination for most foreign nurses and doctors, it is time for the Government to show they care and also appreciate the workers by making some of the restrictions in terms of residency more favourable. This could also reduce the number of care workers leaving the country for other countries that offer better conditions.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":52962,"created_at":"2023-01-16T15:15:56.163Z","updated_at":"2024-11-26T14:30:59.151Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-01-20T06:56:09.649Z","closed_at":"2023-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-17T16:13:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-21T20:27:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-02-14T11:05:50.375Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-08","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-11-18","debate_outcome_at":"2024-11-19T10:15:30.548Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-02-13","summary":"The Government recognises the vital contribution of overseas health workers but to qualify for ILR a person must meet various requirements including a substantial period in their sponsored occupation.","details":"The Government recognises the significant contribution that health and social care workers from overseas have made to the level and quality of care the NHS provides.\n\nHowever, Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) is based on several requirements, including a period of lawful residence in the UK without excess absences, sufficient knowledge of the English language and life in the UK, and any specific requirements of the visa route a person is on.  The standard requirement of 5 years to achieve settlement is based on applicants building up ties and an ongoing commitment to the UK.\n\nIn sponsored work routes, settlement relies on applicants having worked in their sponsored job for 5 years.  Other requirements, such as being able to demonstrate an adequate level of English, are important in ensuring people can properly integrate into the community. We consider being able to integrate is an important element of settlement.  Whilst there are limited circumstances where people may apply for accelerated settlement, these are unsponsored routes such as Global Talent.  Most routes leading to settlement require an individual to have been in the UK on an eligible route for at least 5 years, as we believe this represents an appropriate period of time for people to build ties to the UK.\n\nThe Home Office introduced the Health and Care visa which launched on 4 August 2020.  This delivers and builds upon the Government’s commitment to introduce a route which makes it quicker, easier and significantly cheaper for eligible people working in health and social care to come to the UK with their families.  It also benefits eligible workers in the UK, if they are extending their visa.  This offer has been well received, with the latest immigration figures showing there is a sizeable uptake of this visa offer by the sector with 61,414 people being issued a visa: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-statistics-year-ending-september-2022/why-do-people-come-to-the-uk-to-work.\n\nThe Government announced on 30 January 2023, as part of the ‘delivery plan for recovering urgent and emergency care services’, that we would be relaxing the supplementary work rules.  This will allow Health and Care visa holders to work more than 20 hours per week for an additional employer in health and social care should they wish without having to notify the Home Office.\n\nGiven the provision which we have already put in place, and the importance of people being able to integrate, we do not intend to change the period of time for people to achieve ILR.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2023-02-14T11:05:50.372Z","updated_at":"2023-02-14T11:05:50.372Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-11-18","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-11-18/debates/9E325472-C9C5-44C9-AA47-09CF20512493/IndefiniteLeaveToRemainHealthcareWorkers","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/7UWxWLHVhvI?si=G0bCYfse69y10QJs&t=112","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0150/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-ILR-healthcare-workers/index.html"},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":651094,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/651094.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Exempt Blue Badge drivers from Low Traffic Neighbourhoods","background":"The Government must make it MANDATORY to include in the DVLA Vehicle Registration Database, along with name & address of vehicle owner, an exemption marker for those with Blue Badges or life-threatening conditions, from Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and time restrictions without a clear justification. ","additional_details":"This information must be used by all local Councils & private enforcement companies so as not to issue PCNs to these drivers. It must be at a national level and not on a local level since I believe most Councils are dysfunctional and fragmented with many people working from home. Being fined causes physical hardship, anxiety, even mental health issues & we believe is discriminatory under the Equality Act 2010. It’s wrongly assumed that many disabled people can walk or cycle. We’re not invisible.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1286,"created_at":"2023-11-08T16:59:02.645Z","updated_at":"2024-05-29T13:26:57.254Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-11-24T16:46:15.529Z","closed_at":"2024-05-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-08T20:15:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":null,"government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-04-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-05-20","debate_outcome_at":"2024-05-23T12:59:07.104Z","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-05-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-05-20/debates/676B0381-AC1E-4852-B5F3-C76F72CB1CFC/LowTrafficNeighbourhoods","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/MNvIS8k1aSc","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01097/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-ltns-survey/index.html?utm_source=petitioners&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=[pet-ltns-survey]","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-ltns-debate/index.html?utm_source=petitioners&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=[pet-ltns-debate]"},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":632748,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/632748.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Carry out an independent review into Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs)","background":"The review should look at, but not be limited to, possible benefits and disbenefits they might have to the local and wider area where they are introduced. This should including pollution, road safety, mental wellbeing, effects on the vulnerable, and congestion. Both inside and outside an LTN.","additional_details":"Many residents that live on the boundaries of these LTNs experience increased congestion, road traffic accidents, pollution, damage to their mental wellbeing, and feel like they are not being listened to or consulted.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":15906,"created_at":"2023-02-07T10:53:21.756Z","updated_at":"2024-05-29T14:34:25.215Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-02-09T15:27:52.674Z","closed_at":"2023-08-09T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-02-07T11:20:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-02-27T07:11:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-03-07T15:34:30.778Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-04-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-05-20","debate_outcome_at":"2024-05-23T12:59:05.038Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-04-25","summary":"The Government is already carrying out an evaluation of active travel schemes funded in 2020/21, including LTNs. It has no plans to commission a further review until this has concluded.","details":"Responsibility for traffic management on local roads rests with the relevant local authority as they are best placed to consider how local needs can be effectively met. It is entirely a matter for individual authorities to decide on the nature and scope of policies. The Government, through the Department for Transport, is responsible for setting legislation and for providing guidance to local traffic authorities but has limited direct influence over locally managed roads. Ultimately, Ministers will make decisions relating to matters of Departmental policy.\n\nTo help local authorities make safe provision for pedestrians and cyclists during COVID-19 and to mitigate the lack of capacity on public transport due to social distancing, the Department launched the Emergency Active Travel Fund (EATF). This funding was designed to help local authorities create an environment that is safe for both walking and cycling, allowing people to get around whilst maintaining social distance while also aiding longer term increases in walking and cycling along with the associated health, air quality and congestion benefits. Some local authorities decided to implement temporary LTNs as part of this programme. Many of these were made permanent as part of later funding rounds, where authorities considered that the schemes were working effectively. A number were also removed.\n\nThe Government has been clear that traffic management schemes should always be developed through consultation and engagement with local communities. As a condition of receiving funding provided by Active Travel England (ATE), all local authorities are required to undertake consultation, and monitoring and evaluation work, to ensure that schemes meet the needs of the local area and the people that live there. ATE is an Executive Agency of the Department for Transport.\n\nIn order to better understand the impact of this funding, the Department has appointed contractors to undertake a review of schemes funded through the second tranche of active travel funding, including a deep dive into the impact of segregated cycle lanes and low traffic neighbourhoods. This is being delivered through a call-off contract let in February 2021 after a fair and open competition run in line with the Public Contracts Regulations 2015. Until this work is completed, the Government has no plans to commission a further review.\n\nThe results of the review will be published in due course. Once research has been conducted, policy decisions will ultimately be for Ministers to take.\n\nDepartment for Transport\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/632748)","created_at":"2023-03-07T15:34:30.776Z","updated_at":"2023-04-25T16:25:53.238Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-05-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-05-20/debates/676B0381-AC1E-4852-B5F3-C76F72CB1CFC/LowTrafficNeighbourhoods","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/MNvIS8k1aSc","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn01097/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-ltns-survey/index.html?utm_source=petitioners&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=[pet-ltns-survey]","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/pet-ltns-debate/index.html?utm_source=petitioners&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=[pet-ltns-debate]"},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":648577,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/648577.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Create a Palestinian Family Visa Scheme for Palestinian people affected by war","background":"We want the government to take action and create a Visa scheme that allows Palestinian individuals affected by war, to be allowed into the UK. Just like we did for Ukraine.","additional_details":"This visa would provide them with an opportunity to seek refuge and reunite with their families safely in the UK. By implementing this visa, the government can demonstrate its commitment to compassion, inclusivity, and supporting those who have endured the hardships of war. Together, let's urge the government to enact policies that provide a lifeline for Palestinians seeking safety and a chance to rebuild their lives safely.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":103834,"created_at":"2023-10-11T19:30:42.788Z","updated_at":"2024-05-16T13:00:24.852Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-10-18T14:12:30.466Z","closed_at":"2024-04-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-11T19:41:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-09T15:49:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-12-22T10:08:43.660Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-04-13T22:05:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-04-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-05-13","debate_outcome_at":"2024-05-16T08:43:35.214Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-12-21","summary":"There are no plans to introduce bespoke arrangements for people arriving from the region. Those wishing to come to the UK who currently have no visa can apply under one of the existing visa routes.","details":"The UK Government is monitoring the situation in Israel and Gaza closely to ensure that it is able to respond appropriately.  \n\nWe recognise that some people impacted by the events in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories may wish to join family in the UK. The Government is working with authorities across the region to facilitate the repatriation of British citizens and their family members who already hold permission to come to the UK.   \n  \nThere are currently no plans to introduce bespoke arrangements for people arriving from the region who do not hold permission to come to the UK. That means that immediate family members of British citizens, and those settled in the UK, who wish to come and live in the UK and do not have a current UK visa can apply under one of the existing family visa routes. Individuals who meet these criteria should apply for a visa to enable them to enter the UK in the normal way. Fee waivers are available to those who can not afford the application fee, and exceptional circumstances may be taken into account where certain requirements are not met. \n\nUK Visas and Immigration is working closely with the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office in supporting family members of British nationals evacuated from Gaza who require a visa, signposting the necessary steps and expediting appointments at the Visa Application Centre (VAC). VACs in the region such as Egypt, Jordan and Turkey are open and offering a full service.\n\nSince 2015, over half a million people were offered safe and legal routes into the UK. This includes over 28,600 individuals resettled to the UK under its global UNHCR resettlement schemes, which include the UK Resettlement Scheme, Community Sponsorship and the Mandate Resettlement Scheme. However, our approach must be considered in the round, rather than on a crisis-by-crisis basis.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2023-12-22T10:08:43.657Z","updated_at":"2023-12-22T10:08:43.657Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-05-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-05-13/debates/C04330B1-6243-4B7B-9AFA-66AFCE259FC5/PalestiniansVisaScheme","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/8d975a4d-4b31-4979-a40b-72fdc8f9caf2","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0095/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":653593,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/653593.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Hold a parliamentary vote on assisted dying","background":"This petition calls for the Government to allocate Parliamentary time for assisted dying to be fully debated in the House of Commons and to give MPs a vote on the issue. Terminally ill people who are mentally sound and near the end of their lives should not suffer unbearably against their will.","additional_details":"We believe dying people in the UK should have the option of requesting medical assistance to end their lives with dignity, through a safe and compassionate system with strict eligibility criteria and safeguards. Without this, too many are taking matters into their own hands with tragic consequences. The Daily Express and Dignity in Dying support Dame Esther Rantzen's call for a free vote. The time has come to Give Us Our Last Rights.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":212107,"created_at":"2023-12-21T12:45:55.144Z","updated_at":"2024-10-19T05:52:14.233Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-01-05T10:55:02.168Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-12-21T15:28:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-01-09T10:12:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-02-22T16:40:36.474Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-02-01T19:28:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-03-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-04-29","debate_outcome_at":"2024-04-30T10:00:14.467Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-02-22","summary":"It remains the Government’s view that any change to the law in this sensitive area is a matter for Parliament to decide. ","details":"The Government has the utmost sympathy for anyone experiencing the pain of watching a loved one deal with a life-threatening or degenerative condition.\n\nWhether there are any circumstances in which it should not be an offence to assist another person to die is something on which there are passionately held but deeply divided views. Even amongst those who support a change in the law, there are differing ideas on where the line should be drawn, what safeguards should be in place and for whom.  Conversely, others feel strongly that the law should not be changed and that safeguards will not necessarily give enough protection to vulnerable people who may feel pressure, whether real or perceived, to end their own lives.\n\nIt remains the Government’s view that any change to the law in this sensitive area is a matter for Parliament to decide and an issue of conscience for individual parliamentarians rather than one for government policy. Parliament has debated this issue on several occasions, most recently in July 2022, but has so far voted against proposals to legalise assisted dying.   \n\nThere is a significant amount of government legislation planned in this session and there is, as always, pressure on the government’s timetable. However, the Government is committed to providing time to the Backbench Business Committee which gives MPs the opportunity to bring forward debates of their choice and MPs also have the option of introducing Private Members' Bills which provide MPs with an opportunity to address public concerns and to change the law.\n\nIf the will of Parliament is that the law on assisting suicide should change, the Government would not stand in its  way, but would seek to ensure that the law could be enforced in the way that Parliament intended.\n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2024-02-22T16:40:36.461Z","updated_at":"2024-02-22T16:40:36.461Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-04-29","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-04-29/debates/B3A72309-26A0-4F8F-9B48-308B063B82E5/AssistedDying","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXspGOj680U","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04857/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":640062,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/640062.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Increase Carer's Allowance to 35 hours a week at the minimum wage","background":"We want the Government to increase the amount of Carer's Allowance to match pay for a full-time job.","additional_details":"Being an unpaid carer is a full-time job, and this should be reflected in the rate of Carer's Allowance.\r\n \r\nUnpaid carers eligible for Carer's Allowance receive £76.75 a week to provide at least 35 hours of care to people in receipt of certain benefits. This is almost £300 less than someone earning the National Living Wage (age 23 or over) would be entitled to.\r\n \r\nMany unpaid carers have to give up work to provide care, and being a carer can also have a significant impact on carers wellbeing and lifestyle. Providing appropriate financial support is the least the Government can do.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":13914,"created_at":"2023-06-22T12:50:41.043Z","updated_at":"2024-10-19T05:45:49.488Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-06-28T16:59:18.461Z","closed_at":"2023-12-28T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-06-22T17:05:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-09T21:16:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-10-24T10:25:08.409Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-03-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-04-22","debate_outcome_at":"2024-04-23T13:59:55.027Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-10-23","summary":"Carer’s Allowance is a benefit that provides some financial recognition that a carer may not be able to work full-time. It is part of a range of support based on individual needs, rather than a wage.","details":"The Government fully recognises the invaluable contribution that unpaid and family carers make in providing significant care and continuity of support to their loved ones. Unpaid carers play a vital role in the lives of their family and friends - and since 2010 we have increased Carer’s Allowance by almost £1200 a year.\n\nThis issue has been raised in previous e-petitions:  \n\n• 617874 ‘Increase Carer’s Allowance to equal to 35hrs at National Minimum Wage’, responded to on 20 September 2022, \n\n• 579692 ‘Increase Carer’s Allowance to 35hrs at National Minimum wage’, responded to on 22 April 2021, \n\n• 300032 ‘Pay Carers an allowance equivalent to a fulltime job at National Living Wage’ responded to on 30 July 2020,\n\n•  234864 ‘Pay Carers an allowance equivalent to a fulltime job at the National Living Wage’, responded to on 16 May 2019. \n\nIt is important to emphasise that Carer’s Allowance is not intended to be a replacement for a wage nor payment for the services of caring. It is therefore not comparable with either the National Minimum Wage or the National Living Wage. The principal purpose of Carer's Allowance is to provide a measure of financial support and recognition for people who are not able to work full-time because of their caring responsibilities. Successive governments have supported carers through allowances and benefits, as well as wider cross-government actions, rather than paying people for tasks they undertake in the way an employer would.\n\nUnpaid carers are overwhelmingly caring for a family member or friend, rather than someone unknown to them. The amount of unpaid caring they undertake, and its intensity, will differ from carer to carer, as will their reasons and motivation for accepting caring responsibilities. Many can successfully combine caring with some employment, so will continue to have income from paid employment. Those unpaid carers who do need financial support may be able to get help from the benefits system – and not only from Carer’s Allowance, but from a range of means-tested benefits as well.    \n\nA National Insurance Class 1 credit is generally awarded for each week that Carer’s Allowance is paid to a working-age carer. Class 1 credits can help towards the conditions of entitlement to all contributory benefits, as well as the new State Pension. Receipt of Carer’s Allowance also exempts the carer from the benefit cap. \n\nCarer’s Allowance permits carers to undertake some part-time work if they can do so, without this affecting their entitlement. The earnings limit recognises the benefits of staying in touch with the workplace, including greater financial independence and social interaction. \n\nCarers on low incomes can claim income-related benefits, such as Universal Credit, alongside Carer’s Allowance. These benefits can be paid to carers at a higher rate than those without caring responsibilities through the carer element and the additional amount for carers respectively. Currently, the Universal Credit carer element is £185.86 per monthly assessment period. The additional amount for carers in Pension Credit is £42.75 a week. Around 550,000 (May 2023 data) carer households on Universal Credit can receive around an additional £2,230 a year through the carer element. The Government has chosen to focus extra support on those carers who need it most.   \n\nThe Government will pay around £3.4 billion in Carer’s Allowance in 2022/23. By 2027/28, the Government is forecast to spend just over £4.7 billion a year on Carer’s Allowance.\n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions","created_at":"2023-10-24T10:25:08.406Z","updated_at":"2023-10-24T10:25:08.406Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-04-22","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-04-22/debates/E43FCD87-1F1D-41F4-BE0D-948482756398/Carer%E2%80%99SAllowance","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZur4VsShYc","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0078/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DWP","name":"Department for Work and Pensions","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":631529,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/631529.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Do not remove LGBT content from the Relationships Education curriculum","background":"We believe kids should learn about this at an early age. I am sure there are many parents who want their and other children taught about LGBT issues in primary school.","additional_details":"There is a petition to remove this content, which we believe is discriminatory. LGBT people exist, they have the same rights as the rest of us and kids should know them and accept them without judgement or issue. Despite what their parents might believe.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":104920,"created_at":"2023-01-18T11:32:44.182Z","updated_at":"2024-03-22T11:42:01.203Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-01-20T15:53:04.997Z","closed_at":"2023-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-18T13:13:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-23T20:17:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-01-31T12:47:02.315Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-04-13T10:27:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2024-03-18","debate_outcome_at":"2024-03-22T11:42:01.203Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-01-31","summary":"Primary schools are not required to teach LGBT content but can choose to teach it in an age-appropriate way. The Department for Education has no plans to change its advice to schools on this subject.","details":"To prepare children for life in modern Britain, pupils need to understand the world in which they are growing up. RSHE is therefore designed to give pupils the knowledge they need to lead happy, safe, and healthy lives and to foster respect for other people and for difference. \n\nThe statutory guidance states that all pupils should receive teaching on LGBT content during their school years. Secondary schools should include LGBT content in their teaching. Primary schools are strongly encouraged and enabled, when teaching about different types of family, to include families with same sex parents. \n\nThrough these subjects, children will be taught about the importance of respectful relationships and the different types of loving and healthy relationships that exist. This can be done in a way that respects everyone’s views.  \n\nThe Department for Education has no plans to change its advice to schools on this subject.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-01-31T12:47:02.313Z","updated_at":"2023-01-31T12:47:02.313Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-03-18","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-03-18/debates/4135DD73-1BD4-4F3A-9D5C-8C2C08832790/RelationshipsEducationLGBTContent","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pew-W3ae1qA","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":630932,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/630932.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Remove LGBT content from the Relationships Education curriculum","background":"We believe kids shouldn't learn about this at an early age. I am sure there are many parents who do not want their or other children taught about LGBT in primary school.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":249594,"created_at":"2023-01-08T23:07:08.901Z","updated_at":"2024-03-22T11:35:47.196Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-01-12T17:11:23.805Z","closed_at":"2023-07-12T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-08T23:22:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-15T15:04:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-01-30T17:18:16.113Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-01-17T12:10:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2024-03-18","debate_outcome_at":"2024-03-22T11:35:47.074Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-01-30","summary":"Primary schools are not required to teach LGBT content but can choose to teach it in an age-appropriate way.  The Department for Education has no plans to change its advice to schools on this subject.","details":"RSHE is designed to give pupils the knowledge they need to lead happy, safe, and healthy lives and to foster respect for other people and for difference. \n\nThe statutory guidance states that all pupils should receive teaching on LGBT content during their school years. Secondary schools should include LGBT content in their teaching. Primary schools are strongly encouraged and enabled, when teaching about different types of family, to include families with same sex parents. \n\nThrough these subjects, children will be taught about the importance of respectful relationships and the different types of loving and healthy relationships that exist. This can be done in a way that respects everyone’s views.\n\nAll schools may teach about faith perspectives. In particular, schools with a religious character may teach the distinctive faith perspective on relationships, and balanced debate may take place about issues that are seen as contentious.\n\nIn addition, schools should ensure that parents know what will be taught and when, and clearly communicate the fact that parents have the right to request that their child be withdrawn from some or all of sex education delivered as part of statutory RSE. \n\nSchools should also ensure that, in developing their RSE policy, that  they engage parents and provide examples of the resources they plan to use in lessons. We also expect schools to respond positively where parents ask to see specific materials, for example by inviting parents into the school to view materials where Copyright Law prevents them from sharing it online. \nThe Department for Education has no plans to change its advice to schools on this subject.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-01-30T17:18:16.111Z","updated_at":"2023-01-30T17:18:16.111Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-03-18","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-03-18/debates/4135DD73-1BD4-4F3A-9D5C-8C2C08832790/RelationshipsEducationLGBTContent","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/pew-W3ae1qA?feature=share","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":608237,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/608237.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Free prescriptions for those with a long term and/or chronic condition.","background":"Extend the criteria for medical exemption certificates. The MedEx criteria should include chronic illnesses as acknowledged by the NHS. This includes but is not limited to MS, PCOS, endometriosis, IBD, POTS, depression, anxiety and Ehlers Danlos Syndrome.","additional_details":"Living with a chronic condition can be extremely difficult. The symptoms and complications of having a chronic diseases often means people have to either give up work or reduce their hours - as a consequence some people may not be able to self fund their medication. Another issue is that the number of prescriptions given, for example I’ve been given 20 different medications this year alone. Chronic / LT conditions are not curable, but treatable. This treatment shouldn’t be down to privilege.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":20258,"created_at":"2022-02-06T19:56:07.305Z","updated_at":"2024-03-13T10:12:08.590Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-02-09T16:27:40.257Z","closed_at":"2022-08-09T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-02-06T20:51:58.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2022-02-13T20:41:28.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-03-02T16:13:28.653Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2024-01-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-03-11","debate_outcome_at":"2024-03-13T10:10:39.061Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-03-02","summary":"We recognise the impact of chronic illness. 89% of prescription items dispensed in the community in England have no charge. Those not exempt may save money with a prescription prepayment certificate.","details":"The Government understands the immense challenges faced by those living with chronic or long-term conditions, often having to limit their lifestyles through no choice of their own, as well as the impact on their loved ones. We recognise that many patients with these conditions may need many prescription items to manage their health needs. \n\nWhile not everyone qualifies for free NHS prescriptions there are a broad range of NHS prescription charge exemptions in place in England to help those patients with the greatest need, to ensure that prescriptions are affordable. \n\nEligibility for these exemptions depends on the person’s age, whether they are in receipt of a war pension or certain benefits or tax credits, whether they are pregnant or have recently given birth, whether they are in qualifying full-time education, or have a qualifying medical condition and hold a medical exemption certificate.  Partners and dependents of the person receiving certain benefits are entitled to free prescriptions too. When the medical exemptions were first introduced, only 42% of all NHS prescription items were dispensed free of charge. Now the figure is approximately 89% with around 60% of the English population not paying prescription charges at all. There are currently no plans to make changes to the list of medical conditions. Many people with medical conditions not on the exempt list already get free prescriptions on other grounds, with current exemptions already providing valuable help for those on the lowest incomes and for the most vulnerable in society.  \n\nThose who may not be exempt but who are on a low income can seek help under the NHS Low Income Scheme (LIS). This Scheme provides help with health costs on an income-related basis. The level of help available is based on a comparison between someone’s income and requirements at the time a claim is received, or at the time a charge was paid, if a refund is claimed. Further information on the NHS LIS, including how someone can apply, is available on the NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) website at:  https://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/nhs-low-income-scheme\n\nMore information on free prescriptions can be found here: https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/prescriptions-and-pharmacies/who-can-get-free-prescriptions/\n\nAnyone who has to pay NHS prescription charges and needs many prescription items, such as those with long term conditions, can save money with a prescription prepayment certificate (PPC). A three-monthly PPC costs £30.25 and an annual PPC costs £108.10. The annual PPC will save people money if they need more than 11 items in a year. For example, if someone needs 2 items per month, they will save £116.30 with an annual PPC, if 3 items are needed per month the saving is £228.50 with the annual PPC. To help spread the cost, people can pay for an annual PPC by ten monthly direct debits.  \n\nPPCs can be obtained by calling 0300 330 1341 (local rates), online through the NHSBSA’s website at:\nhttps://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/help-nhs-prescription-costs/prescription-prepayment-certificates-ppcs\nor buying one from a registered pharmacist (listed on the NHSBSA website).\n\nThe revenue from prescription charges is reinvested to benefit more NHS patients. In 2019/20 these charges contributed nearly £614 million towards vital and much needed health care for patients. \n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2022-03-02T16:13:28.627Z","updated_at":"2022-03-02T16:13:28.627Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-03-11","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-03-11/debates/EDB8FEA3-E72A-4D60-B768-5A28694A8486/PrescriptionChargesLong-TermHealthConditions","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEeQ9SGYVdo","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":649894,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/649894.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Stop the implementation of betting affordability/financial risk checks\r\n \r\n","background":"We want the Government to abandon the planned implementation of affordability checks for some people who want to place a bet. We believe such checks – which could include assessing whether people are ‘at risk of harm' based on their postcode or job title – are inappropriate and discriminatory.","additional_details":"The proposed checks could see bettors having to prove they can afford their hobby if they sustain losses as low as £1.37 per day. We accept the need to help those with problem gambling but more intrusive checks triggered at a higher threshold risks bettors moving to the black market where there are no consumer protections or safer gambling tools. We are concerned there will also be a negative impact on British horseracing’s finances due to a reduction in betting turnover and resulting fall in Levy yield.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":103537,"created_at":"2023-10-25T08:52:45.209Z","updated_at":"2024-05-02T14:51:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-11-01T17:08:30.391Z","closed_at":"2024-05-01T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-25T09:16:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-02T10:42:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-11-16T17:33:31.616Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-28T21:11:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-01-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-02-26","debate_outcome_at":"2024-03-04T15:04:17.711Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-11-16","summary":"We are committed to a proportionate, frictionless system of financial risk checks, to protect those at risk of harm without over regulating. The Gambling Commission will set out plans in due course. ","details":"The government and Gambling Commission recognise concerns some have with the proposed system of financial risk checks for the highest spending online customers to help identify and tackle gambling related harm. We share the goals that the checks should not overregulate the gambling sector, should not unduly disrupt the millions of people who gamble without suffering harm, and should not cause unnecessary damage to sectors which rely on betting, in particular horseracing. The government is a strong supporter of horseracing, and recognises that it is not the job of either the government or the Gambling Commission to tell people how to spend their money. As outlined in the gambling white paper we are seeking to balance this freedom with the necessary action to tackle the devastating consequences which harmful gambling can have for individuals and communities. \n\nImportantly, the proposals will represent a significant improvement for both businesses and customers compared to the current situation. While the Gambling Commission does not currently have specific requirements or thresholds, we know that operators are applying inconsistent ‘affordability’ checks on a number of customers, often without being clear on why the checks are happening, and normally requiring customers to provide data manually. We have challenged operators to be more transparent with customers in the interim, but the proposed system will be a significant improvement in having clear and proportionate rules which all operators are held to, and allowing for financial data to be shared seamlessly with operators instead of burdening customers with information requests. Both the government and the Gambling Commission have been clear that we would not mandate the checks proposed in the consultation until we are sure that they will be frictionless for the vast majority of customers who would be checked.\n\nThis careful targeting of interventions has been a guiding principle during the development of the proposed financial risk checks. We are seeking to protect those at the greatest risk of devastating and life-changing financial losses, and there is a clear need for specific requirements on online operators to prevent substantial unchecked spend. We recognise that this needs to be proportionate, which is why the proposed checks are only on the very highest spending online customers, conducted frictionlessly using data sharing, and do not come with blanket rules for operator interventions if there are no signs of harm. We estimate that the financial risk assessment using data from credit reference agencies will only impact those in the highest 3% of gambling losses. These factors significantly limit the risk of customers migrating to the black market as very few will have their experience in the licensed sector disrupted, either by the checks themselves or as a result of their findings. The financial risk checks are also intended to operate alongside existing requirements on operators to use a range of data to identify customers at risk of harm and decide whether or how to intervene. \n\nThe Gambling Commission’s consultation, which ran from 26 July to 18 October, received over 2,400 responses, many of which focused on financial risk checks. Those responses, and this petition, show the benefit of engaging the public ahead of implementing proposals.  The regulator and government are working to ensure all views are considered as the proposals are finalised.\n\nFinally, this petition raises the important link between betting and horseracing. The government recognises the enormous value of horseracing as both a spectator sport and through its economic contribution. The white paper’s estimate was that financial risk checks will reduce online horserace betting yield by 6% to 11%, which would in turn reduce racing’s income by £8.4 to £14.9 million per year (0.5% to 1% of its total income) through a reduction in levy, media rights and sponsorship returns. We are working with racing and refining that estimate. We have also commenced a review of the Horserace Betting Levy to ensure a suitable return to the sport for the future.\n\nThe government and Gambling Commission are working with the industry and others to ensure the checks can be implemented in an effective but proportionate way. We are also exploring the role of pilots or phased implementation to help ensure this. The Gambling Commission will set out details on its plans in due course. \n\nDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2023-11-16T17:33:31.614Z","updated_at":"2023-11-16T17:33:31.614Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-02-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-02-26/debates/8860118F-57B3-428D-99CC-D719D3CDEEB4/FinancialRiskChecksForGambling","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DabniNPdhgg&t=2s","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0034/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":633591,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/633591.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"End the use of animals for toxicity tests & prioritise non-animal methods (NAMs)","background":"Radically divert funding and evolve policy to implement the use of NAMs in all regulatory toxicity tests. Actively encourage use of NAMs, noting that this data is of superior human relevance compared to animal tests data. Establish clear pathways to develop & validate NAMs and end the use of animals","additional_details":"In 2021, 302,423 animals were used in regulatory tests, including 2,431 dogs and 1956 primates, primarily in legally required ‘tick box’ safety/toxicity studies. Yet, animal tests cannot reliably predict human responses to chemicals or pharmaceuticals, or provide adequate information regarding safety and efficacy. Evidence shows NAMs to be more predictive of human biology, more economically advantageous via new prospects in scientific innovation, and prevent the suffering of millions of animals.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109378,"created_at":"2023-02-21T09:02:28.589Z","updated_at":"2024-03-01T14:10:56.167Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-03-08T14:41:13.990Z","closed_at":"2023-09-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-02-21T10:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-05-11T08:27:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-05-24T15:31:22.066Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-08-23T18:02:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-01-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-02-19","debate_outcome_at":"2024-02-20T13:13:28.665Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-05-24","summary":"The Government is already supporting technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and we will continue to review funding for non-animal methods as part of our normal processes.","details":"The pace of technology in modelling is creating new opportunities to replace some traditional animal “models” and the Government is already supporting and accelerating advances in biomedical science and technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and importantly to avoid some of the scientific limitations of animal models of human diseases. We will continue to review funding for non-animal methods as part of our normal processes. Although we all want to reduce and, as far as possible, replace the use of animals in scientific procedures with non-animal alternatives for human safety and it is still necessary to rely on some testing through the carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research.\n\nThe UK has a strict regime of regulations to avoid unnecessary testing. Under UK law no animal testing may be conducted except for a permissible purpose if there is no non-animal alternative available, where the number of animals used is the minimum needed to achieve the scientific benefit, and where the potential harm to animals is limited to that needed to achieve the scientific benefit. These purposes include: to assess the safety of medicines or chemicals; protect the environment; allow the development of medicines; and conduct basic scientific research to understand how biological systems and processes work.  The use of animals in such testing is strictly limited to purposes that are necessary to achieve the scientific benefits.\n\nAnimal testing is required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), to protect humans and the wider environment. Without the testing of potential medicines on animals the development, registration and marketing of new, safe, and effective medicines would not be possible. The animal species for testing of potential medicines are specifically chosen to give as much human relevant information as possible and to avoid species specific reactions which would not predict human effects. Many products which would be unsafe or ineffective in humans are detected through animal testing thus avoiding harm to humans.\n\nToxicity and safety testing provides important information into the biological effect of substances which enable precautions to be taken to protect humans, animals and the environment from adverse effects of products used in medicine, industry, agriculture and households. In the UK it is required by law that all new drugs are tested within two species. This is done to protect humans as the comparative data from both species allows researchers to be confident that toxic effects will be identified in the pre-clinical stages of testing. This approach ensures the safety of healthy volunteers who take part in clinical trials as well as patients who will take the medication.\n\nThe UK has a world-leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs principles: that is to, as far as possible, replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research. This is a model that is being replicated internationally. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is strongly committed to the 3Rs and provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research. The NC3Rs is widely recognised as being world leading, supporting research and innovation that provides researchers in academia and industry with technologies that are more predictive, cost-effective and humane than current animal models. Since it was established, the NC3Rs has invested £77 million in research and almost £27 million in contracts through its CRACK IT Challenges innovation scheme to UK and EU-based institutions, mainly focusing on new approaches for the safety assessment of pharmaceuticals and chemicals that reduce the use of animals.\n\nProgrammes funded by the NC3Rs have both identified problems and found innovative solutions through science led approaches and alongside others, they have developed a Non-Animal Technologies Roadmap setting out a 2030 vision and strategy for how non-animal technologies could be used to replace the use of animals in research across a number of sectors. The NC3Rs has also set out its strategy to increase the focus on animal replacement technologies as well as championing high standards in animal research. Further information is available at: https://www.nc3rs.org.uk/news/nc3rs-publishes-its-strategy-next-three-years\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation & Technology","created_at":"2023-05-24T15:31:22.053Z","updated_at":"2023-05-24T15:31:22.053Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-02-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-02-19/debates/0C64E6BD-AE31-4DD7-80BB-3CEDC6272C2E/a","video_url":"https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/facbbfd0-29e5-4cbb-92fe-aa326b45bde6","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0028/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":645885,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/645885.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the use of dogs for testing and research purposes in the UK","background":"Dogs display a range of emotions, and their cognitive abilities are complex and advanced. Dogs in laboratories are forced to endure not only psychological trauma due to their restrictive environment but can also undergo harmful experiments that cause pain and suffering.","additional_details":"In 2022, the number of dogs experimented on in Great Britain was 4,122. Most are used in regulatory procedures for testing the safety of products and devices for human medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine. An All-Party Parliamentary Group has acknowledged that 92% of drugs fail in human trials despite being tested on animals. Given the low scientific value of these experiments, combined with major advances in non-animal methods (NAMs), we believe testing on dogs should be banned, in the same way as for Great Apes since 1997.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":32267,"created_at":"2023-09-30T15:52:58.622Z","updated_at":"2024-04-07T13:23:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-10-06T08:39:48.004Z","closed_at":"2024-04-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-30T16:02:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-11T15:06:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-12-06T10:55:50.188Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2024-02-19","debate_outcome_at":"2024-02-20T13:11:34.241Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-12-06","summary":"The government does not agree to the proposed ban. Testing would continue in other countries. The UK still requires such data to ensure the safety of medicines before testing in humans. ","details":"While there is a drive to replace the use of animals in scientific procedures with suitable non-animal alternatives, the carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research remains necessary to protect humans and the wider environment. The Government therefore does not agree to ban the use of dogs for testing and research purposes in the UK. \n\nThe use of animals remains important for understanding how biological systems work, in the development of safe new medicines, treatments and technologies, and in testing chemicals. Therefore, our current approach is to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs), and to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards.\n\nThe use of animals in science is highly regulated, including a three-tier system of licensing which licenses each establishment, project and individual involved in performing regulated procedures involving animals. All establishments are required to have dedicated individuals, including veterinary surgeons with legal responsibilities for the care and welfare of animals, and an ethical review body, which reviews any proposals for the use of animals and promotes the 3Rs of animal use. The UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\n\nThe UK has the highest welfare score in the G7 according to the world Animal Protection Index and some of the highest animal welfare standards in the world. Since the 2021 publication of the Action Plan for Animal Welfare, we have delivered key manifesto commitments: we have increased the penalties for those convicted of animal cruelty, passed the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022 and launched the Animal Sentience Committee.\n\nThe Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) requires testing on a suitable animal model by developers seeking regulatory approval, in the development of certain new medicines. The MHRA aligns with international regulatory bodies and the pharmaceutical industry in this position. Following development of the drug thalidomide where testing in pregnant rodents did not identify it as a teratogen, the requirement to use a second mammalian species (a non-rodent) was implemented for most testing to better identify toxicity of relevance to humans. It should be noted that the MHRA does not require all medicines to be tested, by developers, on two species as some drugs lack their primary mode of action in animal species other than primates. However, most drugs do retain their activity in animal species and safety testing in a second species is therefore required for these drugs, with dogs being one of the species that can be used. The MHRA does not itself use dogs in scientific procedures.\n\nAnimal testing reduces harm to humans by preventing testing of drugs not suitable for human use. In addition, a large proportion of the drugs that fail in clinical trials do so on efficacy grounds, that is that confirmatory clinical trials do not show the intended clinical benefit. Signals from safety pharmacology or animal toxicity studies are key in identifying the clinical monitoring and determining the starting and maximum dose levels used in clinical trials.\n\nOnce there is initial clinical evidence of safety, typically generated under these conditions of close monitoring, there is more extensive clinical testing into whether the drug is effective at treating patients and whether this use is safe. Whereas clinical use may continue for years, depending on the nature of the patient’s disease, toxicity testing in dogs is limited in duration: in the UK and European Union, this period is 6 months.\n\nThe Government is supporting and accelerating advances in biomedical science and technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and importantly to avoid some of the scientific limitations of animal models of human diseases. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling techniques. \n\nUK Research and Innovation (UKRI) is strongly committed to the 3Rs and provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research. Since it was established, the NC3Rs has invested £89.3 million in research grants and almost £34 million in contracts through its CRACK IT Challenges innovation scheme to UK and EU-based institutions, mainly focusing on new approaches for the safety assessment of pharmaceuticals and chemicals that reduce the use of animals.\n\nDepartment of Health & Social Care","created_at":"2023-12-06T10:55:50.186Z","updated_at":"2023-12-06T10:55:50.186Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-02-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-02-19/debates/0C64E6BD-AE31-4DD7-80BB-3CEDC6272C2E/a","video_url":"https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/facbbfd0-29e5-4cbb-92fe-aa326b45bde6","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0028/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":641904,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/641904.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Call an immediate general election","background":"The Prime Minister should call an immediate general election to allow the British public to have their say on how we are governed, we should not be made to wait until January 2025","additional_details":"Consistent opinion polling has shown the British public have lost confidence in the current government. The NHS is in crisis, the asylum system is broken, there are delays at the ports, and institutions are failing. The British people should be given a say on what to do next.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":288042,"created_at":"2023-08-01T14:44:03.495Z","updated_at":"2024-11-20T09:13:45.242Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-08-04T09:50:48.668Z","closed_at":"2024-02-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-08-01T16:41:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-04T13:33:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-10-18T15:53:44.060Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-06T13:47:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-01-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-01-29","debate_outcome_at":"2024-01-30T16:36:31.255Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-10-18","summary":"Britain faces long-term challenges that need us to put the national interest first. Rishi Sunak and this Government are doing just that and it would be wrong to call an early general election now.","details":"The impact of Covid and the war in Ukraine have created huge long-term challenges for Britain that require decisive action.\n\nThe Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, is making the hard but necessary long-term decisions for the future of the UK, unlike the politicians focused on the short-term and lacking the backbone to make the big changes Britain needs.\n\nIn January, the Prime Minister set out his top five priorities for 2023 to building a better, more secure, more prosperous future:\n\n● Halve inflation this year to ease the cost of living and give people financial security.\n\n● Grow the economy, creating better-paid jobs and opportunity right across the country.\n\n● Make sure our national debt is falling so that we can secure the future of public services.\n\n● Cut NHS waiting lists so people will get the care they need more quickly.\n\n● Pass new laws to stop small boats, making sure that if you come to this country illegally, you are detained and swiftly removed.\n\nThe Government is putting national interest over self-interest, and is doing what is right, not what is easy.\n\nThe process for calling the next general election is clearly set out under the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022. It would not be right for the country to call an early disruptive general election now.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2023-10-18T15:53:44.058Z","updated_at":"2023-10-18T15:53:44.058Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-01-29","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-29/debates/F41116A1-EE14-45F8-B196-7DE3A22750D4/NextGeneralElection","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/85d7c999-7df8-43a0-b393-d3c56eab43e1","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0013/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":643216,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/643216.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Reform the Grocery Supply Code of Practice to better protect farmers","background":"We want the Government to amend the Grocery Supply Code of Practice (GSCP) to require retailers, without exception, to:\r\n\r\n- Buy what they agreed to buy\r\n- Pay what they agreed to pay\r\n- Pay on time\r\n\r\nWe believe the current GSCP is inadequate and doesn't protect farmers from unfair behaviour.","additional_details":"Almost half (49%) of a panel of 100 UK fruit and veg farmers fear they will have to give up their farm within the next 12 months, and many raised concerns about the behaviour of supermarkets, with 69% agreeing that tougher regulations are required to redress the imbalance of power between farmers, processors and the supermarkets.\r\n\r\nThe current GSCP contains provisions that are meant to protect suppliers, but allows supply agreements to be varied in certain circumstances. We believe a stronger, clearer code of practice is needed to make sure that all supermarkets stick to fair practices when dealing with farmers.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":113515,"created_at":"2023-08-31T15:55:14.568Z","updated_at":"2024-03-15T00:00:19.787Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-09-14T12:01:50.514Z","closed_at":"2024-03-14T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-08-31T18:36:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-20T10:55:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-11-27T14:57:51.712Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-23T16:22:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2023-12-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-01-22","debate_outcome_at":"2024-01-23T15:54:27.491Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-11-27","summary":"The Government is committed to tackling contractual unfairness that can exist in the agri-food supply chain and Defra is working to support farmers and ensure they get a fair price for their products.","details":"At the UK Farm to Fork Summit held at Downing Street on 16 May, we announced a new review into fairness in the horticulture supply chain building on what we have already got underway to improve transparency and contracts in the pork and dairy markets. Beginning in December, we will launch a public consultation exploring these issues. We will analyse the responses and provide a formal response that provides a summary of the findings and sets out next steps. We can only decide what, if any, action is needed once we have analysed the responses, but I can assure you we will use the powers in the Act to bring forward legislation, wherever necessary.\n\nThis review seeks to understand issues relating to fairness in the supply chain across the whole of the UK. If responses indicate there are contractual issues that we believe we should seek to address, the powers in the Agriculture Act apply to the whole of the UK. If regulations are developed, we will engage widely with stakeholders, including the devolved administrations, to ensure that legislation works for all parts of the UK and incorporate special provision for differing circumstances, if necessary.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2023-11-27T14:57:51.710Z","updated_at":"2023-11-27T14:57:51.710Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-01-22","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-01-22/debates/F4E6009C-23CF-4160-8575-AC2A6ED0F9CD/GroceriesSupplyCodeOfPractice","video_url":"https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/2c0f93b2-17a9-45d8-a54c-8c6db67f2ba8","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0007/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":625515,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/625515.json"},"parliament":{"period":"2019-2024","government":"Conservative","dissolution_at":"2024-05-30T00:01:00.000+01:00","response_threshold":10000,"debate_threshold":100000},"attributes":{"action":"Review and increase foster care allowances and tax exemptions","background":"We want the Government to review and increase allowances paid to foster carers, and also tax exemption levels for foster carers, so they reflect the true cost of caring for a child.","additional_details":"FosterTalk's Cost of Living report shows:\r\n\r\n- 43% of carers may leave fostering in the next 2 years\r\n- 56% of carers haven’t received an uplift in allowances and those who have, 90% felt it doesn’t cover the cost of caring for a child\r\n- 38% of carers have experienced mental health issues due to the crisis\r\n\r\nThe number of carers is declining and it’s expected there’ll be a deficit of around 25,000 foster care families by 2026 in England alone. The cost of living crisis is worsening the situation.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":13310,"created_at":"2022-10-17T08:48:34.435Z","updated_at":"2024-01-17T16:51:17.066Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-10-24T12:45:24.717Z","closed_at":"2023-04-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-10-17T09:11:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-03-12T14:32:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-03-31T15:39:21.655Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":"2023-12-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2024-01-15","debate_outcome_at":"2024-01-17T16:51:17.066Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-03-31","summary":"Allowances are reviewed annually. Minimum rates will rise by 12.43% from April. Tax allowances for foster carers have been reviewed and rise from April, representing an average annual tax cut of £450.","details":"Whilst fostering can be hugely rewarding, we recognise that it takes hard work, skill and dedication. Foster families deserve to be valued and respected for what they do every day for our most vulnerable children. Allowances and tax arrangements for foster carers have both recently been reviewed and increased.\n\nThe Fostering Services: National Minimum Standards (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fostering-services-national-minimum-standards), issued by the Secretary of State under the Care Standards Act 2000, set out the expectations that are placed on foster parents and their fostering service providers. This includes the expectation that foster parents should not be financially disadvantaged because of their fostering role. We expect all foster parents to receive at least the weekly National Minimum Allowance (NMA), in addition to any agreed expenses to cover the full cost of caring for each child placed with them (standard 28).\n\nThe NMA is routinely uplifted each year.  From April 2023, the minimum rate of allowance will increase by 12.43%. This represents an increase of between £17 and £30 in allowances per week, resulting in foster carers receiving £154 - £270 per week depending on the age of the children they foster and their location. This above-inflation increase to the minimum level at which foster carers should be paid will help foster parents cover the increasing costs of caring for a child in their home.\n\nQualifying Care Relief (QCR) is a tax relief available to support foster carers, in addition to some other carers. It ensures a carer’s income is not taxed unless it exceeds an overall QCR allowance. \n\nAs part of the budget, the Chancellor announced that the QCR  threshold, a form of tax relief for foster carers and shared lives carers, would be nearly doubled to £18,140. In addition, to maintain the value of the relief in real terms, starting in 2024/25, HMRC will be increasing these rates in line with CPI inflation. This increase will ensure that the vast majority of foster carers are taken out of tax on their care income. These changes represent an average tax cut of £450 per year for foster carers, as well as simplifying the process for self-assessment returns for most foster carers. Further information on changes to QCR can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/increase-in-qualifying-care-relief/qualifying-care-relief-increase\n\nAlongside these changes, we are investing over £27 million this Spending Review to deliver a fostering recruitment and retention programme so foster care is available for more children who need it. This will boost approvals of foster carers in areas of specific shortage, and test and develop a best practice regional model that can then be rolled out. We will also establish a network of expertise and support for all local authorities.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-03-31T15:39:21.652Z","updated_at":"2023-03-31T15:39:21.652Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2024-01-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-15/debates/69D801F2-9C8D-4ABA-B0D6-5B9B8760C548/FosterCarersAllowancesAndTaxArrangements","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/743e94ac-6372-444c-b685-edf01524505a","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2023-0233/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}}]}