{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=41&parliament=4&state=with_response","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?parliament=4&state=with_response","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=41&parliament=4&state=with_response","next":null,"prev":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=40&parliament=4&state=with_response"},"data":[{"type":"archived-petition","id":589057,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/589057.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":"Introduce a Telugu GCSE","background":"Telugu is the 3rd most spoken language in India and ranks 15th in the world. Currently there are over 50,000 Telugu people spread across the UK. In spite of this Telugu is not available as a GCSE subject. We want the government to support the heritage language speakers by introducing GCSE in Telugu.","additional_details":"A majority of heritage language speakers in the UK have an opportunity to sit for a GCSE in their language. Unfortunately, Telugu people don’t. A chance to get a grade or a certificate by a worldwide recognised board like GCSE at the end of learning telugu gives a sense of achievement and motivates students to learn and work harder with a clearer goal. British Telugus should have a GCSE in Telugu like majority of the heritage language speakers in the UK so they can learn in a structured way.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10281,"created_at":"2021-06-17T09:58:11.698Z","updated_at":"2022-01-10T16:52:59.096Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-06-22T14:34:30.189Z","closed_at":"2021-12-22T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-06-17T10:22:15.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-12-16T09:31:08.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-01-10T16:52:45.673Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-01-10","summary":"Exam boards are responsible for deciding which language GCSEs are offered. The Government would support exam boards in developing a language GCSE– including in Telugu – if there is sufficient demand.","details":"Deciding which languages are offered at GCSE is the responsibility of exam boards. \n\nThe Government is committed to increasing the number of pupils studying languages to GCSE level, including languages that are commonly spoken in modern day Britain. It is for this reason that teaching of languages is in the national curriculum from age 7 to 14, and why GCSEs in languages are included as part of the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) suite of subjects. \n\nAt present, there is no GCSE in Telugu. Exam boards can produce a GCSE in any modern language, and this decision would be informed by a number of important factors, including the level of demand from schools and the proportion of the population in the UK speaking the language. Thus, there is no reason in principle why a GCSE in Telugu could not be introduced, and the Government would support any exam board wishing to do so. This is,  however, at the discretion of exam boards to determine whether or not there was a strong case to do so. \n\nThere are currently eighteen GCSEs in different modern languages produced and currently offered by exam boards in England. The specification for these qualifications must meet the Department for Education GCSE subject content requirements for modern languages, last published in 2015, and are accredited by the independent qualifications regulator, Ofqual. \n\nTwo exam boards that provide GCSEs in England, AQA and Pearson Edexcel, currently offer language GCSEs in a number of other languages spoken in India, including Bengali, Gujarati and Panjabi. This is in part reflected by languages spoken in this country other than English. Thus, in 2013, the Office for National Statistics undertook an analysis of languages in England and Wales by using data from the 2011 Census. Not taking into account English, it was found that Panjabi (273,000) was the second most common language spoken by 0.5% of the population; Bengali (221,000) the fourth most common; and Gujarati (213,000) the fifth most common. Other commonly spoken languages were Polish (546,000), Urdu (269,000) and Arabic (159,000). It is therefore reasonable to expect that GCSEs are available in all six of the most commonly spoken languages in England. \n\nThe Government recognises the importance of language learning. Studying a language can be extremely rewarding and exciting, providing an insight into other cultures and opening the door to travel and a wide range of employment opportunities. Languages can also broaden pupils’ horizons, helping them flourish in new environments and, in many cases, increase community cohesion. \n\nIt is, however, up to schools to decide which languages are taught as part of their curriculum, both at primary and secondary school, and the government does not specify which languages should be taught or how to teach them. When deciding which languages to offer their pupils, schools are likely to consider the needs of the community in which they serve. \n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2022-01-10T16:52:45.671Z","updated_at":"2022-01-10T16:52:45.671Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":300183,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/300183.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":"Equal (50/50) rights for both parents in the event of a separation.","background":"Automatically grant equal rights (50/50) for both parents in the event of a divorce or separation prior to any court proceedings or legally binding agreements. It should be written in law that after a separation both parents have equal rights to see their own children.","additional_details":"Limit the unreasonable amount of control mothers have over fathers having access to their own children. Many fathers suffer due to the automatic power given to mothers who use children as a bargaining chip. This is not good for a Childs development and is mentally harmful.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10279,"created_at":"2020-03-03T22:36:48.848Z","updated_at":"2020-09-25T12:58:57.955Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-06T10:07:08.032Z","closed_at":"2020-09-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-04T09:38:54.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-02T10:52:04.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-09-24T11:48:08.769Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-09-21","summary":"Neither parent has a legal right to a minimum amount of parenting time as the child’s welfare is the paramount in all court decisions about their upbringing.","details":"The legislative framework which governs decisions about a child’s upbringing is gender neutral and focused on the welfare of the child and not any perceived rights of parents to any particular form or amount of parental involvement.  Each case is determined on the facts by an independent judiciary, including in particular any risk of harm that the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering.\n\nLegislation introduced in October 2014 is intended to help parents, regardless of gender. It puts beyond doubt the approach of the family court to parental involvement when asked by either parent to make an order about child arrangements. Under the law, the court is required to presume that the involvement of a parent in the life of the child concerned will further that child’s welfare, unless it can be shown that this would not be so.  There would need to be very good reasons for a court to decide that a parent should not spend time with their child or that there should be no parental involvement at all.\n\nSection 1(1) of the Children Act 1989 provides that the welfare of the child shall be the court’s paramount consideration when making any decision about a child’s upbringing.  Under the provisions of the Children Act 1989, parents (as well as others who are eligible) can apply to a family court for a child arrangements order.  This order may determine with whom a child is to live or spend time. If the court deems it necessary, the order can also provide for ‘no contact’ to be made with a child by any party to the order. \n\nJudges in deciding disputed child arrangements are guided by the ‘Welfare Checklist’ set out in section 1(3) of the 1989 Act. This is a checklist of factors which the court must by law have regard to when determining what is necessary to meet the child’s welfare needs. For example, the factors in the checklist include consideration of any harm which the child has suffered or is at risk of suffering and how capable each of his parents or other persons are of meeting the child’s needs.\n\nThe law does not give either parent any legal right to any particular amount or pattern of involvement in their child’s life. If the court determines that a shared residence arrangement is necessary to meet the child’s welfare needs it can make an order to that effect. However, each case is decided on the facts and circumstances of each child and each family.\n\n A mandatory 50:50 or substantially shared care arrangement of children would put some children and vulnerable parents at risk of domestic violence or neglect. In a significant proportion of child arrangements disputes before the courts, there are alleged serious welfare concerns which, in addition to domestic abuse, include drug or alcohol misuse.\n\nThe issue of parental involvement, and the current approach set out in the Children Act 1989, was considered at length prior to the introduction of legislation in 2014 which implemented the current presumption in law that a parent’s involvement will further a child’s welfare, unless there is evidence to the contrary.\n\nThe Government in 2012 consulted on various options for a parental involvement presumption in England and Wales, stopping short of specifying any quantum of parenting time.  The presumption is a starting point and is rebuttable where there is evidence of harm or the risk of harm to a child.  If a parent can be involved in the child’s life in a way that does not put them at risk of harm, the court will then consider what is necessary to meet that child’s welfare needs.  This approach is compatible with the existing child-centred approach in the Children Act 1989.\n\nMore recently, the Ministry of Justice published the report from a panel of experts in June 2020 in which the Government has committed to review the presumption of parental involvement. Following concerning evidence submitted to the panel, we will consider whether the existing presumption strikes the right balance between the child’s right to a relationship with both parents, and the welfare of the child and each parent. We will announce further details soon.\n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2020-09-24T11:48:08.767Z","updated_at":"2020-09-24T11:48:08.767Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":596771,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/596771.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":"Make it a specific criminal offence to supply drugs to children under 16","background":"I want to see a change in the law to make clear that any person under the age of 16 cannot consent to taking illegal substances. This will have a two pronged effect in keeping young people safe but also holding those who supply accountable for death and serious injury as a result.","additional_details":"On 11/5/19 I lost my beautiful daughter. Leah went out with her friends that night She experimented with MDMA, which killed her. I got a call to say she isn’t well, shortly after I got there Leah took her last breath. The 2 boys found guilty of supplying MDMA that night got 21 months and 12 months, the max sentence under current law. only serving 6 months each. It’s illegal to by alcohol/cigarettes and to consent to sex under 16, there must be more safety measures against drugs been offered to children.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10275,"created_at":"2021-09-09T20:49:20.792Z","updated_at":"2022-08-03T09:47:41.451Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-10-06T13:27:31.847Z","closed_at":"2022-04-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-09-09T21:35:08.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2022-03-30T18:47:09.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-04-21T11:01:44.451Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-04-21","summary":"Protecting children from harm is a priority for government. However as existing offences already apply for drug supply, we have no plans to make it a specific offence to supply a child with drugs.","details":"The death of Ms Roberts’ daughter, Leah, is a tragedy. We can assure you that this Government takes drug misuse very seriously. Drugs can devastate lives, ruin families and damage communities.  This Government’s approach to them remains clear - we must prevent drug misuse in our communities and support people through treatment and recovery.\n\nIt is an offence under section 4 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 to supply a controlled drug to any person. This does not differentiate between different classes of person based on age or any other characteristic. The offence is made out simply where a person supplies a controlled drug to another person or offers to supply a controlled drug to another person. It would therefore be an offence under s.4 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 to supply a controlled drug to a person under the age of 16. This is subject to certain lawful exemptions: for example, where a controlled drug is a medicine that has been lawfully prescribed, or where it is supplied under the terms of a Home Office licence.\n\nUnder the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, the penalty for supply of Class A drugs is up to life in prison, an unlimited fine or both. Supply of Class B and Class C drugs has a penalty of up to 14 years in prison, an unlimited fine or both.\n\nGiven supply to a child under 16 is covered by the Misuse of Drugs Act the Government does not have any plans to create an additional, specific offence.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2022-04-21T11:01:44.448Z","updated_at":"2022-04-21T11:01:44.448Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":603619,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/603619.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 build two new prisons at Wethersfield Air Base","background":"We believe the Government is reneging on commitments in the Environment Act to stop the decline of wildlife by proposing to develop two mega-prisons on the site of the old Wethersfield airfield, which has become an important space for nature near Braintree, Essex.","additional_details":"Some 74 species of birds, many Red-listed, nest nearby and the area comprises 75,000 trees and shrubs. The site also includes ancient woodland, as well as Great Crested Newts and rare orchids. Red-listed birds on the site include European Turtle Dove, Northern Lapwing and Grey Partridge.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10269,"created_at":"2021-12-14T15:06:37.694Z","updated_at":"2022-09-09T13:59:55.968Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-12-17T16:28:13.927Z","closed_at":"2022-06-17T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-12-14T17:52:38.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2022-05-10T19:47:09.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-06-15T15:57:02.433Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-06-15","summary":"The Government is undertaking the largest prison build programme in more than a century, one of the sites being considered is Wethersfield Air Base, a planning application has not yet been submitted.","details":"The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is considering the site at Wethersfield for new prisons as part of the MoJs New Prison Programme. The proposal is for one Category B training prison and one Category C resettlement prison to accommodate around 1,700 prisoners each. The MoJ has not yet decided whether to submit a planning application.\n\nThe proposed prisons, if built, would be the greenest prisons built so far and follow a new design that helps aid rehabilitation of offenders, helping make our communities safer. The new prisons would also create over 1,200 permanent jobs in the local area once the prisons were operational and hundreds of local jobs during construction.\n\nThe MoJ ran a pre-planning public consultation to seek feedback from the local community on these proposals in the Braintree District. The consultation ran from 27 September until 8 November with face to face consultation sessions on the 14 and 15 October. Residents were able to have their say by submitting comments online, over the phone or by post. We appreciate the feedback received and had around 1,800 responses.\n\nThe MoJ are currently deciding whether to proceed to submitting a planning application for new prisons on the Wethersfield site and taking time to consider the information received from the public consultation, stakeholder engagement and the results of ecological surveys on the site.\n\nThe MoJ are committed to adhering to the Environment Act and have followed due process by engaging ecologists to conduct relevant surveys and provide the necessary advice on mitigation action required to offset the impact of the proposed development. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, reptile survey, and dormouse survey were conducted in 2020. A Breeding Bird Survey (BBS), great crested newt surveys, invasive non-native species survey, and an updated Phase 1 habitat survey were conducted in 2021. A Wintering Bird Survey was conducted in winter 2021/2022. A bat Preliminary Roost Assessment (PRA) has been conducted in 2022, and the following surveys are ongoing: bat activity surveys, bat roost surveys of buildings, invertebrate surveys, and a botanical survey.\n\nThe findings of these surveys have guided, and would continue to guide, the formulation of an appropriate mitigation response to the impacts of the proposed development. An ecology chapter would form part of the Environmental Statement for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) if a planning application is submitted.\n\nTo mitigate the ecological impact of building on this site, prison landscaping would use native planting and seed mixes as far as possible.  \n\nThe loss of any trees, scrub, and buildings would be mitigated/compensated. Brown hares use the site, and appropriate mitigation/compensation would be provided. Great crested newt impacts are limited to habitats on land (no ponds would be lost), and we propose following the District Level Licensing route with Natural England, to offset any impacts.\n\nThe invertebrate surveys target a wide range of rare and notable species, including priority species. We are confident that the needs of any priority species can be accommodated within the habitat provisions envisaged.\n\nThe MOJ is committed to Environment Act and to the protection of wildlife. The MoJ currently operates a number of prisons in Sites of Special Scientific interest (SSSI’s) and on sites with protected species of birds and other wildlife. Any proposals put forward for Planning Permission would have a commitment to protect the wildlife on the site and to mitigate the impact of the proposed development. \n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2022-06-15T15:57:02.431Z","updated_at":"2022-06-15T15:57:02.431Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":572266,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/572266.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":"Make feeding horses/ponies and livestock a specific criminal offence","background":"A lot of owned animals including horses and ponies have special diets or are prone to illnesses caused by the wrong food.","additional_details":"Livestock if fed the wrong food can get ill and or die and the livelihood of farmers could be at stake. \r\n \r\nHorses and ponies can and HAVE choked or got seriously ill resulting in death, because of passersby 'going to feed the animals'.\r\nThe wild ponies of the UK are at risk just as much from being wrongly fed. Resulting again in illnesses and death.\r\n \r\nWe have tried signs and fences to no avail.\r\n \r\nThe Government needs to take action and stop unnecessary deaths of animals.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10268,"created_at":"2021-01-27T09:00:00.825Z","updated_at":"2021-08-10T09:33:35.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-02-05T17:55:52.704Z","closed_at":"2021-08-05T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-27T09:20:17.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-06-25T10:42:15.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-07-09T14:45:16.161Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-07-09","summary":"The Government shares the public’s high regard for animal welfare and takes action on welfare issues. Our refreshed Countryside Code reminds the public to not feed livestock, horses or wild animals.","details":"We are a nation of animal lovers. The Government is committed to further enhancing our high animal welfare standards and maintaining our position as a global leader in this area, as demonstrated by the recent launch of our Action Plan for Animal Welfare.\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/action-plan-for-animal-welfare \n\nWe will continue to lead the way in setting standards for horse welfare, complemented by the work done by the equine welfare sector which promotes good welfare practice through its websites and via social media e.g. National Equine Welfare Council’s compendium:\nhttp://www.newc.co.uk/advice/ \n\nThe British Horse Society also works on behalf of all horses in the UK to protect and promote their interests and has published a campaign encouraging the public to be more horse aware at:\nhttps://www.bhs.org.uk/our-work/welfare/our-campaigns/be-horse-aware.\n\nOur refreshed Countryside Code, (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-countryside-code) published in April 2021, encourages people to do the right thing when vesting the countryside and promotes positive behaviour to ensure the protection of our outdoor spaces and wildlife.\n\nChanges to the Code include reminders not to feed livestock, horses or wild animals and to stay on marked footpaths, even if they are muddy, to protect crops and wildlife. The Code also advises the public to give animals plenty of space and applies to all land where livestock could be present whether fenced or unfenced, such as moors and commons. It also reminds the public to follow local signs and keep to marked paths unless wider access is available.\n\nNatural England will continue to promote the refreshed Countryside Code over the summer months.\n\nDefra considers that current legislation and guidance provides the right safeguards and powers in respect of horse welfare. However, we will continue to engage with key stakeholders to see if more can be done to encourage best practice among horse owners, as well as increased partnership working in order to tackle the issue of inappropriate feeding of horses and livestock by the general public. Further details of the actions we are taking to enhance and protect animal welfare can be found in our Action Plan for Animal Welfare. \n\nUnder the Animal Welfare Act 2006, it is an offence to cause any animal unnecessary suffering or to fail to provide for its welfare. Anyone who is cruel to an animal, or does not provide for its welfare, may be fined, imprisoned and banned from owning or keeping animals. Welfare Codes are made to help keepers understand their obligations under this Act, and guidance on the correct feeding of horses, ponies and donkeys, and the risks of toxic plants can be found in the Code of practice for the welfare of horses, ponies, donkeys and their hybrids: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/700200/horses-welfare-codes-of-practice-april2018.pdf  \n\nThe Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 (the Act) realises the Government’s manifesto commitment to increase the sentences available to our courts for the most serious cases of animal cruelty. The Act came into force on 29th June and provides some of the toughest sanctions in Europe, strengthening the UK's position as a global leader on animal welfare.  The Act’s new maximum sentence of five years and/or an unlimited fine will apply to the most serious animal cruelty offences, including causing unnecessary suffering, and is a significant step forward in improving animal welfare.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2021-07-09T14:45:16.158Z","updated_at":"2021-07-09T14:45:16.158Z"},"debate":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":634860,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/634860.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":"Make knife crime prevention a compulsory requirement for all school curriculum","background":"The James Brindley Foundation wants to see schools educate children in a program of consequential thinking, that speaks openly in the use of knife crime.\r\nThe Dept for Education is reviewing the RSHE curriculum; our petition asks the DfE to introduce knife crime prevention to this curriculum.\r\n","additional_details":"Deaths, serious injuries occurring amongst young people has become a pandemic on our streets. The ONS states recorded knife crime offences increased 10% to 49,027 year to March 2022 in England and Wales. This is a 34% increase since 2010/11 yet there is no national program of education for children and young people, and no targeted guidelines in the curriculum for such behaviours or prevention.\r\n \r\nAfter meeting with MPs, local government and other agencies, the JB Foundation is calling for ACTION.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10236,"created_at":"2023-03-14T19:32:03.704Z","updated_at":"2023-12-22T12:41:25.502Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-03-17T14:49:09.722Z","closed_at":"2023-09-17T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-03-15T08:50:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-08T22:11:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-10-05T15:30:46.117Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-10-05","summary":"DfE will shortly consult publicly on draft amendments to the RSHE statutory guidance before a new version is finalised and published in 2024. DfE will also consider this petition as wider evidence.","details":"The national curriculum is DfE’s responsibility. DfE has made a commitment not to make any changes to the National Curriculum for the remainder of this Parliament, which was reiterated in the Schools White Paper last year. This was to embed the major 2014 curriculum reforms and to provide stability for schools and pupils following the pandemic. It also is an important commitment for teacher workload, given the workforce burden associated with curriculum change(s).\n\nHowever, RSHE, which sits within the basic school curriculum has, since 2020, included content on the situations that often lead young people to carry weapons such as knives, including criminal exploitation though involvement in gangs and county lines drugs operations and in particular the grooming relationships that often accompany this. The RSHE curriculum does not reference knife crime explicitly, but schools have discretion to tailor the content of the curriculum to address the threats that face their pupils specifically.  \n\nIssues around gun and knife crime can also still be taught as part of a school’s wider curriculum. For example, schools can choose to include lessons on weapons awareness and gangs as part of their Personal, Social, Health and Economic Education (PSHE) or Citizenship curriculum.\n\nMore generally, through RSHE, pupils are taught how to build positive and respectful relationships and appropriate ways of resolving conflict, including a clear message that resorting to violence is never acceptable. Pupils need to know how to be safe and healthy, and how to manage their academic, personal, and social lives in a positive way.  \n\nIt is important that teachers have the confidence to teach RSHE effectively, and to help schools with this we have already published a range of online Teacher Training Modules- https://www.gov.uk/guidance/teaching-about-relationships-sex-and-health - covering each of the key subject areas, including Respectful Relationships, Being Safe and Internet Safety and Harms.  We have also delivered training for schools, webinars and conferences.\n\nDfE is undertaking a review of the statutory guidance on RSHE, which sets out the curriculum, and will be consulting publicly on draft amendments this autumn, so interested parties will be able to contribute comments and suggestions on knife crime prevention. We will take responses into account in finalising content before publishing final guidance next year. We will also consider this petition as wider evidence.\n\nFor those children who are most vulnerable to serious violence, including knife crime, we recognise that more intensive support may be needed in and around their schools. That is why DfE is investing over £50 million to fund specialist support in both mainstream and Alternative Provision (AP) schools in the areas with the highest numbers of serious violence offences. In mainstream schools, school-led SAFE (Support, Attend, Fulfil, Exceed) taskforces have been established in 10 areas and are investing in evidence-based interventions (such as mentoring) delivered in schools. The Alternative Provision Specialist Taskforces (APST) programme is piloting embedding teams of specialists including mental health therapists, speech and language therapists, youth justice workers and family workers in 22 AP schools.  \n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2023-10-05T15:30:46.114Z","updated_at":"2023-10-05T15:30:46.114Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":577765,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/577765.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":"Urge the UN to intervene in Myanmar with a peace keeping force","background":"The Government should urge the United Nations to rapidly send a peace keeping force to Myanmar to protect the people of that country from the violence and repression currently being metered out by the military dictatorship that has taken control.","additional_details":"Reports from Myanmar show that the military dictatorship are prepared to use lethal force against its own population. Everyday we see increasing numbers of deaths and injuries carried out by the self-imposed dictatorship. If the military and police forces in that country are not forced to exercise restraint then the situation is likely to get rapidly worse. We cannot allow the situation to develop into a full scale civil war, or genocide, or ethnic cleansing. Firm decisive action is required now.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10232,"created_at":"2021-03-03T20:06:44.661Z","updated_at":"2021-09-19T23:00:09.143Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-03-19T13:50:23.125Z","closed_at":"2021-09-19T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-03-03T21:08:05.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-06-05T10:36:25.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-06-17T13:13:59.714Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-06-17","summary":"The UK has led a strong international response, including through our G7 Presidency and our leadership role at the UN Security Council. We will continue to explore all avenues to resolve this crisis.","details":"We share your deep concern about the events unfolding in Myanmar and are monitoring the current situation closely. The UK Government condemns the military coup in Myanmar, violence against the people of Myanmar, and the detention of members of the civilian government and civil society, including State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi and President Win Myint. \n\nWe are deeply concerned by the appalling violence inflicted on the people of Myanmar by the Myanmar Security Forces, including against children. The violent crackdown on peaceful protestors must end. My thoughts go out to all those who have been killed and injured whilst protesting for democracy. People’s right to peaceful protest should be respected. We urge the military to exercise utmost restraint and respect human rights and wider international law. \n\nThe UK has led a strong, coordinated international response, including through our G7 Presidency and our leadership role on Myanmar at the UN Security Council. On 10 March, the UK secured a Presidential Statement at the UN Security Council, which condemned the violence against peaceful protestors. On 4 February, we also convened a UN Security Council Press Statement. We co-led a Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) on 12 February securing a consensus resolution on the coup. We secured a strong resolution at HRC46 on 24 March, passed again by consensus. Further, we secured G7 statements on 3 and 23 February. On 5 May, we secured G7 Foreign and Development Ministers’ Meeting Communiqué that condemned the coup in the strongest terms and called on the military to restore Myanmar to the path to democracy. This was reiterated in the Communiqué from the G7 Leaders’ Summit on 13 June.\n\nA UN peacekeeping operation would require UN Security Council authorisation. We do not believe that the necessary support exists in the Council at present. As a champion of democratic governance, the UK is working hard to keep the Myanmar crisis on the Security Council’s agenda. We will continue to press for firm and decisive action at the Security Council, and elsewhere. We will continue to use all the tools at our disposal to encourage dialogue, find a peaceful resolution to the crisis, and restore democracy.\n\nWe have now sanctioned the two key military conglomerates Myanmar Economic Holdings Ltd (MEHL) and Myanmar Economic Corporation (MEC). On 17 May, the UK also imposed sanctions on Myanmar Gems Enterprise, a State Owned Enterprise responsible for all gems activity in Myanmar. We will continue to work to directly target the military’s financial interest. These sanctions follow the designation, in February, of nine senior military individuals, including the Commander in Chief, for their role in serious human rights violations during the coup. We are working closely with partners on further targeted and coordinated action to ensure the military is held to account.\n\nWe have provided £500,000 of additional funding to the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar to bolster their capacity to collect and preserve evidence of serious human rights violations.\n\nWe have welcomed ASEAN’s efforts to resolve the crisis, and ASEAN’s ‘five point consensus’, including on the need for the immediate cessation of violence and the commencement of constructive dialogue among all parties concerned. We are committed to constructively supporting ASEAN’s efforts, including the work of the ASEAN Special Envoy.\n\nForeign, Commonwealth & Development Office","created_at":"2021-06-17T13:13:59.711Z","updated_at":"2021-06-17T13:13:59.711Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":658381,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/658381.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 British Nationals (Overseas) immediate entitlement to British citizenship","background":"We want the UK Government to grant British Citizenship to the Hong Kong people holding the valid British National (Overseas) passports immediately and unconditionally, instead of having these people applying for BNO visa scheme and then waiting for 5+1 years to apply for British Citizenship.","additional_details":"This petition is based on the circumstances as follows:\r\n \r\n1/ China has been found to breach the Sino-British Joint Declaration.            \r\n \r\n2/ Concerns that Chinese and Hong Kong authorities have failed to abide by their international human rights commitments and violate the universal rights and freedoms of Hong Kong people.\r\n \r\n3/ Britain should never abdicate her moral responsibility to her former colonial subjects from Hong Kong.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10229,"created_at":"2024-03-03T21:34:47.641Z","updated_at":"2024-12-12T09:48:23.186Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-03-18T17:28:20.236Z","closed_at":"2024-05-29T23:01:00.000Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-03-03T23:10:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-24T10:32:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-11-01T16:20:51.834Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-12-03","summary":"We remain committed to the BN(O) route, allowing BN(O)s and their families to live, study, and work in the UK. However, we have no plans to amend the law to grant immediate British citizenship.","details":"The British National (Overseas) (BN(O)) route allows those with BN(O) status and their eligible family members to come to the UK to live, study and work in virtually any capacity, on a pathway to acquiring British citizenship. The current requirements for a person with BN(O) status to gain citizenship are in line with those for naturalisation, allowing a person to demonstrate a continuing connection with the UK.\n\nThe UK, in its Memorandum following the Sino-British Joint Declaration 1984 on the future of Hong Kong, made a commitment that those who were British Dependent Territories Citizens only through a connection with Hong Kong would be eligible to retain a status which, without conferring the right of abode in the UK, would entitle them to continue to use passports issued by the UK Government. It is important that the UK upholds the commitments it made as part of the Joint Declaration.  We therefore have no plans to amend the current law in regard to BN(O) status.\n\nNevertheless, we remain committed to the people of Hong Kong and to supporting BN(O) status holders and their family members who choose to come to the UK. After five years in the UK, those on the BN(O) route can apply for settlement, and after a further 12 months, they can apply for British citizenship under section 4(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981 (BNA).  Section 4(2) of the BNA 1981 does not have a knowledge of language and life in the UK (KoLL) requirement, but BN(O) status holders who are in the UK on the BN(O) route, will need to demonstrate that they have sufficient knowledge of English and life in the United Kingdom to qualify for settlement.\n\nInformation on applying for citizenship is available at: https://www.gov.uk/british-citizenship/how-to-apply.\n\nThere are also other circumstances where BN(O)s can be registered as British citizens:\n\n• the British Nationality Hong Kong Act 1997 provides for the registration of British nationals who would otherwise be stateless and are ordinarily resident in Hong Kong; and \n• BN(O)s can also apply for registration under section 4B of the 1981 Act if they do not have another citizenship or nationality.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2024-11-01T16:20:51.832Z","updated_at":"2024-12-12T09:48:13.673Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":550276,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/550276.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 all unpaid work trial periods ","background":"Unpaid trial shifts are open to exploitation as they can be used by unscrupulous employers to take advantage of vulnerable people looking for a job. Often unpaid trials are for minimum wage jobs and the people applying for them cannot afford to work for free but may have no other option.","additional_details":"Potential employees might feel as though they can't say no to these exploitative trials without risking their future livelihood. It is unfair to force someone to work for hours without pay for a job they might not even be given. Moreover, there is the cost of travelling to and from the trial shift as well as having to buy a uniform such as a shirt, trousers, plain t-shirt etc. These are things that unemployed people cannot afford to be wasting money on and shouldn't have to for a job that is unpaid.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10218,"created_at":"2020-09-04T18:32:46.945Z","updated_at":"2021-06-14T11:01:25.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-09-14T10:24:37.962Z","closed_at":"2021-03-14T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-04T18:43:54.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-03-13T23:19:55.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-04-08T12:45:30.739Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-04-07","summary":"The Government already takes robust enforcement action against employers who exploit workers on unpaid trials, and therefore has no plans to ban them.","details":"UK employment law sets out the statutory minimum rights and responsibilities for individuals and employers in the workplace. The Government has always been absolutely clear that employers must take their employment responsibilities seriously and cannot simply opt out of them.\n\nNational Minimum Wage legislation provides that an individual who is ‘working’ for minimum wage purposes must be paid at least the National Minimum Wage or National Living Wage. Most workers in the UK who are over compulsory school age and who ordinarily work in the UK are entitled to be paid at least the minimum wage.\n\nAs part of a recruitment process, an individual may be asked by a prospective employer to carry out tasks, without payment, to help the employer to decide whether the individual has the skills and qualities required for the job.\n\nAn individual will generally be a ‘worker’ if they have a contract of employment or a contract to provide work or services. There may be a contract even though there is nothing in writing. Where an employer asks an individual to carry out a ‘trial’, ‘test’ or ‘recruitment exercise’, the individual may nevertheless be a ‘worker’ and entitled to minimum wage, depending on the circumstances of the case.\n\nThere are no definitive rules or tests. Work trials have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis by HMRC enforcement officers and, where necessary, by courts and tribunals. They will take account of the precise detail of the arrangements, including the duration and what the worker is being asked to do, and are likely to take account of the following factors:\n\n• Whether a ‘work trial’ is genuinely for recruitment purposes;\n\n• Whether the trial length exceeds the time that the employer would reasonably need to test the individual’s ability to carry out the job offered;\n\n• The extent to which the individual is observed while carrying out the tasks;\n\n• The nature of the tasks carried out by the individual and how closely these relate to the job offered;\n\n• Whether the tasks carried out have a value to the employer beyond testing the individual; and\n\n• Whether trial periods are important (aside from recruiting) to the way the employer runs its business.\n\nThe Government is aware of reports of some unpaid trial work periods extending across more than one full shift or several days. Unpaid trials of this sort of length in a real (not simulated) work environment are likely to create an entitlement to minimum wage in all but very exceptional circumstances. This is because what is done by the individual would almost certainly have substantial value to the employer rather than testing the individual’s ability.\n\nHowever, an unpaid trial work period lasting a few hours may be reasonable and not create an entitlement to minimum wage. This is because the main purpose would likely be to test the individual, and what is done would probably have little or no other value to the employer: the substance of the arrangement would concern recruitment rather than providing work. Unpaid work trial opportunities as part of a genuine recruitment process could help workers to gain substantive employment.\n\nThe Government has published guidance, with illustrative examples, to clarify the rights and obligations of workers and employers, respectively. Any worker who has concerns about unpaid work trials is strongly encouraged to call Acas (Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service) on 0300 123 1100 for free, impartial and confidential advice. Acas officers will pass on cases to HMRC for further consideration where appropriate. HMRC officers consider every complaint they receive and will take enforcement action where they consider workers are being exploited under the cover of recruitment. As such, the Government does not currently have any plans to ban unpaid work trials.\n\nDepartment for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy","created_at":"2021-04-08T12:45:30.737Z","updated_at":"2021-04-08T12:45:30.737Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":608931,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/608931.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":"Investigate massive delays and inconsistencies within the Passport Office","background":"The government should investigate the current state of the Passport Office and work towards improving the service overall by shortening wait times, fixing the dire standard of customer service and implement a more detailed tracking system for people's applications.","additional_details":"Current inconsistent wait times and responses (or therefore lack of) from the passport office is currently causing immense amounts of stress for people applying/renewing their or their children's passports. \r\n\r\n10 weeks processing time, passports and important documents going missing and total lack of communication or explanation of what is happening at each step in the process causes people to call in/complain online and receive useless responses after paying extortionate amounts of money.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":10191,"created_at":"2022-02-16T21:43:39.038Z","updated_at":"2022-10-27T12:26:49.385Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-02-22T13:26:10.347Z","closed_at":"2022-08-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-02-17T20:28:08.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2022-08-07T18:24:19.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-08-24T07:15:59.667Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-10-11","summary":"Government does not intend to investigate but the National Audit Office is investigating performance due to unprecedented demand this year. Any resulting recommendations will be carefully considered.","details":"In a normal year, HM Passport Office processes 7 million passport applications. Due to COVID-19, only 4 million applied in 2020, and 5 million in 2021. \n\nFollowing the return of unrestricted international travel, HM Passport Office forecasted that up to 9.5 million British passport applications would be made in 2022.\n\nHM Passport Office prepared extensively for this unprecedented demand. A project team operated throughout the second half of 2021 with sole focus on ensuring readiness across the service. This included consideration of supplier preparedness, system resilience, and operational capacity.\n\nThese preparations have ensured the service has responded robustly to the challenges of this year. More British passport applications have been processed than ever before, with an average of 800,000 applications being completed each month. This has been helped by increasing staff numbers by 1,200 since April 2021. HM Passport Office will continue to recruit to cover attrition and ensure it remains fully resourced.\n\nThis impact of COVID-19 on passport services is not unique to the UK, with passport issuing authorities across the world reporting increased processing times.\n\nSince April 2021, people have been advised to allow up to 10 weeks when applying for their passport from the UK. 96.4% of applications were completed within that timeframe between January and July of 2022. Where an application from the UK has taken longer than 10 weeks, and the customer can evidence that they are due to travel within the next fortnight, then their case will be prioritised at no additional cost.\n\nWith elevated demand for passports expected to continue in 2023, it is anticipated applications will take longer than in pre-pandemic years. However, every effort will be made to return processing times to the previous timeframes as soon as possible.\n\nIn response to Teleperformance’s delivery of the Passport Adviceline not meeting the required standard, the Home Office has worked constructively with them to ensure that they meet the needs of passport customers. Their performance has improved significantly, and across August they exceeded the required service standard for calls answered.\n\nEach month, HM Passport Office conducts customer surveys with its customers to gather feedback about the service provided. In July 2022, 72% scored 8, 9, or 10 out of 10, for their experience (where 10 is excellent). In preparation for the continued high demand, further efforts will be made to enhance the service offered. This will include improvements to messaging and customer contact, to help better meet the needs of those with an application in progress.\n\nWhile any loss of document is regrettable, it is comparatively rare. Every attempt is made to recover misplaced documents, and HM Passport Office works with its suppliers to develop measures to reduce the number of losses.\n\nAlthough the Government has no plans to investigate, the National Audit Office will be reporting on the effectiveness of managing the passport service, in response to correspondence received from Members of Parliament and the public. Alongside its own efforts to continue to improve the service provided, HM Passport Office will carefully consider any recommendations made by the National Audit Office to help ensure that it continues to best meet the needs of its customers.\n\nHome Office\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/608931)","created_at":"2022-08-24T07:15:59.664Z","updated_at":"2022-10-13T16:53:42.916Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":626210,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/626210.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":"Extend temporary admission for UA refugees to use cars with UA registration","background":"I want to ask the UK parliament and government to temporarily allow UA refugees to use their cars for the same duration as the \"Homes for Ukrainians\" scheme.\r\nThe UK has a mechanism of temporary admission in place form c110, and we ask to extend it and let UA refugees apply for this admission.","additional_details":"UA refugees are forced to change their UA registration to British, which makes it impossible to return their cars to Ukraine.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10178,"created_at":"2022-10-20T21:39:15.065Z","updated_at":"2023-05-11T16:10:56.077Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-10-24T15:31:44.765Z","closed_at":"2023-04-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-10-20T22:07:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-04-21T19:06:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-05-11T16:10:56.061Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-05-11","summary":"To ensure road safety for all drivers on UK roads, foreign imported vehicles must generally be registered with the DVLA and issued with UK licence plates.","details":"The UK is leading the way in supporting Ukraine following the illegal invasion by Putin. The Department for Transport (DfT) has been actively engaged in making the transition to life in the UK as seamless as possible and is continuing to explore further support for the Ukrainian community in the UK.\n\nThis is not always straightforward and one area where Ukrainian arrivals have had to adapt is in motoring. Vehicle registration and associated vehicle standards are vital to UK motoring to ensure road safety. Ukrainian vehicles that have been temporarily brought to the UK are treated the same as any other foreign registered vehicle brought in by non-UK residents.\n\nWe understand that vehicle registration can be complex given the steps to take change dependent on the age, make, model and condition of vehicle. Given the unique circumstances in which Ukrainians entered the UK, the DfT and associated agencies have permitted some temporary modifications to vehicles to be accepted in certain circumstances where a Ukrainian visa holder vehicle requires Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA), such as the use of beam deflector stickers. Ukrainians can trigger these requirements by mentioning their visa status when applying for IVA, and then showing that visa when they bring their vehicle in for testing.\n\nSpecific agency personnel have also been assigned to support Ukrainians who wish to register their vehicle. If a Ukrainian national is in any doubt regarding the changes that may, or may not, be required to their vehicle before registration, we recommend contacting the relevant UK authority – which have specific resource available to support Ukrainians. This can be accessed by contacting the Driving and Vehicle Licencing Agency (DVLA), Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) or Vehicle Certification Agency (VCA) as appropriate with an e-mail titled ‘Ukrainian VISA query’.\n\nDVLA: advice on vehicle registration applications and driving licences \nEmail: vehiclepolicytriage@dvla.gov.uk\nWebsite: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/driver-and-vehicle-licensing-agency \n\nDVSA: advice on the examination of non-EU compliant vehicles and to carry out inspections for an Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) certificate \nEmail: enquiries@dvsa.gov.uk \nWebsite: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/driver-and-vehicle-standards-agency \n\nVCA: advice on the GB Individual Vehicle Approval (IVA) conversion process for EU compliant vehicles \nEmail: vehicleimporting@vca.gov.uk \nWebsite: www.vehicle-certification-agency.gov.uk \n\nDepending on the type of IVA, the VCA or DVSA will be able to advise on vehicle standards or modifications required.\n\nIn addition to this, the Department has provided opportunity for the public to be consulted on a proposal to extend beyond the current 12-month period the time during which a Ukrainian visa holder that holds a Ukrainian driving licence is able to drive cars in GB on that licence. Following the outcome of the consultation process, in line with legal procedures, government will look to introduce any legislation as soon as practicable.\n\nThe UK government does not have any jurisdiction on the rules, regulations and costs associated with vehicles returning to Ukraine. However, it is recommended that Ukrainians keep all paperwork and original licence plates when registering their vehicle with the DVLA. Any original paperwork will be returned, whilst licence plates do not need to be sent to the DVLA. DfT understands from the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine that Ukrainian vehicles which have the right paperwork and relevant number plates will be able to be immediately used in Ukraine on return to the country.\n\nDepartment for Transport","created_at":"2023-05-11T16:10:56.059Z","updated_at":"2023-05-11T16:10:56.059Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":300274,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/300274.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":"Introduce a form of proportional representation for all UK elections","background":"First Past The Post is the electoral system currently used for elections to the Westminster Parliament, local councils in England and Wales, and constituency seats in devolved administrations. It does not accurately reflect votes cast and needs replacing with a system of proportional representation.","additional_details":"The government has a large majority in Parliament on a minority of the vote (56% of seats on 43% of votes cast). This is not a mandate for any ruling party, because only voters in marginal seats can influence results. Safe seats usually do not change party, discouraging voter turnout. The government’s forthcoming constitutional commission must review the current voting system in a non-partisan manner. Opinion polls consistently show public support for a system in which seats match votes.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10135,"created_at":"2020-03-04T13:29:29.098Z","updated_at":"2022-02-10T10:50:34.436Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-06T15:14:18.502Z","closed_at":"2020-09-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-04T14:07:04.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-08-29T19:19:04.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-09-24T16:05:56.585Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-09-24","summary":"First Past the Post is a robust way of electing MPs, providing a clear and well-understood link between constituents and their representatives, and is more likely to lead to stable Governments.","details":"The First Past the Post system is a robust and secure way of electing Members of Parliament. It is simple - in each constituency the  candidate for whom more people voted than for any alternatives is elected. It provides a clear and well-understood link between constituents and their representatives in Parliament. Proportional voting systems have a tendency to result in coalition or minority governments which can lead to governments being indecisive or unstable. Furthermore, such voting systems can lead to small parties having significant power in coalition formations and therefore exercising power beyond their electoral representation. Parties which have become unpopular with the electorate can also continue to retain a stake in power.\n\nIn 2011,  more than two thirds of electors voted in favour of retaining the First Past the Post System in the referendum on electoral reform. The Government was elected on a manifesto commitment to continue to support First Past the Post and has no plans to change the voting system away from this system.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2020-09-24T16:05:56.583Z","updated_at":"2020-09-24T16:05:56.583Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":638297,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/638297.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 police carry tranquilizer guns and ban use of police firearms on animals","background":"Please require that the police have tranquilizer guns and training for the safe sedation of animals. Make it law that police firearms cannot be used on dogs and other animals.","additional_details":"Sedating an animal is much more ethical than shooting them. Shooting animals or pets can cause a lot of anger, trauma and distress in the community. We think this is also detrimental for the police and their community relations.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10129,"created_at":"2023-05-18T13:43:29.766Z","updated_at":"2024-01-16T16:56:37.947Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-06-15T11:35:54.469Z","closed_at":"2023-12-15T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-05-18T13:54:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-11-23T21:28:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-01-16T16:53:47.757Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-01-16","summary":"Shooting an animal is a last resort. Expert licensed veterinarians, not police officers, are best placed to administer tranquilizers in a safe, humane way to avoid increasing risk of animal suffering.","details":"Firearms officers are highly trained and deployed to high risk scenarios where there is a serious threat to life or imminent danger. Police deployments to animal incidents must be authorised and are limited to scenarios where the immediate destruction of an animal is needed due to the danger posed by that animal or to prevent unnecessary suffering where no licensed animal professional is available or able to do it. \n\nShooting an animal is a last resort and traumatic for all those involved but the use of tranquilizers is complex, involving specialist equipment and expert knowledge. Administering tranquilizers without such expertise, risks ineffective incapacitation, which could escalate situations and result in greater risk to the public and the animal. \n\nVets are best placed with the knowledge and expertise to authorise and administer the correct tranquilizer and dosage, dependent on the size and species of the animal. Any decision to authorise tranquilizers must be taken in the presence of, or under the instruction of, a veterinary professional. If police were required to tranquilize, in some instances this would inhibit their ability to deal with an immediate threat to safety. However, where a veterinary surgeon or licensed professional is available, they manage the situation and use tranquilizers where appropriate and available. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs handles policy around controls and licences around the prescription of tranquilizers for animal use. \n\nOfficers can be called where an animal has sadly been injured and it would prolong the animal’s suffering to await a vet. Recognising the importance of animal welfare, every officer who may be required to shoot an animal in the course of their duties is specially trained in the selection of appropriate firearms and ammunition and how to ensure swift resolution without causing any unnecessary suffering.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2024-01-16T16:53:47.754Z","updated_at":"2024-01-16T16:56:31.477Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":649686,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/649686.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":"Revoke citizenship/benefits from anyone who supports or has supported terrorism","background":"The Government should revoke citizenship and access to benefits from anyone who supports or has supported terrorism.","additional_details":"Home Office guidance states that anyone who \"incites, justifies or glorifies\" terrorist violence or \"seeks to provoke others to terrorist acts\" will ordinarily be denied citizenship. However, there are individuals in the UK holding citizenship that have supported terrorist groups. This petition is to revoke citizenship and access to benefits from anyone who supports or has supported terrorism and already holds citizenship.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10096,"created_at":"2023-10-22T01:00:27.751Z","updated_at":"2025-01-07T17:45:34.867Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-11-13T18:08:27.467Z","closed_at":"2024-05-13T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-22T07:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-05-08T18:05:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-10-16T09:54:26.141Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-12-18","summary":"Current powers allow for deprivation of citizenship of the most dangerous people including those who support terrorism. The decision must be proportionate and must not leave the person stateless.","details":"Section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981, provides that the Secretary of State may by order deprive a person of citizenship status if the Secretary of State is satisfied that it is conducive to the public good and the person will not be left stateless as a result of deprivation.\n\nIndividuals deprived of their citizenship lose any entitlements and benefits associated with British citizenship status, including the right to hold a British passport. There is a statutory right of appeal against a decision to deprive.\n\nUnder section 40(4) the Secretary of State may also deprive a naturalised British citizen of citizenship on the grounds it is conducive to the public good if:  \n• the person has conducted themselves in a manner which is seriously prejudicial to the vital interests of the UK; and  \n• there are reasonable grounds for believing that the person could, under the laws of another country or territory, become a national of that country.\n\n“Seriously prejudicial” is a high threshold, which would include individuals involved in terrorism, espionage and taking up arms against British or allied forces.\n\nDeprivation of citizenship where it is conducive to the public good is used against those who pose a threat to the UK or whose conduct involves very high harm, for example in response to activities such as those involving: \n• national security including espionage and acts of terrorism; \n• unacceptable behaviour such as the support of or glorification of terrorism; \n• war crimes; \n• serious organised crime.\n\nThe power has historically been used only after very careful consideration of the individual facts of each case, and after ensuring that the decision to deprive would comply with the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness.\n\nThe power has never previously been used in the blanket way proposed in this petition, which would mean depriving a person of their citizenship, irrespective of any assessment of the individual facts of each case; the personal circumstances of the individuals to whom the power would be applied; the seriousness of the threat or harm involved in each instance; or the need to comply with international law.\n\nIt would therefore be a considerable departure from past precedent, and from the intentions of Parliament when Section 40 of the British Nationality Act was first introduced, to use the power in that kind of blanket way now.\n\nFull guidance on deprivation of citizenship is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/deprivation-of-british-citizenship-caseworker-guidance.\n\nWhere the power to deprive citizenship is used, it is understood that this can cause significant disruption to that individual’s life – such as losing their job or access to benefits. However, we do not believe that such disruption should be a barrier to that person losing their citizenship.\n\nTo turn more specifically to the subject of benefits, and how they work in relation to deprivation of citizenship, it is important to note that in order to access income-related benefits, an individual must have a right to reside in the United Kingdom.\n\nThis means an individual has either: \n• British or Irish citizenship;\n• a form of Home Office immigration leave that does not restrict access to benefits;\n• is exempt from immigration control. \n\nTherefore, if an individual is deprived of their British citizenship, they would lose their right to reside and would already no longer be able to access benefits.\n\nIf the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is made aware of a change in a customer’s circumstances, either by the customer directly or by another government department (such as the Home Office), then the relevant claim will be reviewed. This includes if the Home Secretary deprives citizenship on the grounds it is conducive to the public good and the person will not be left stateless as a result of deprivation.\n\nIf an individual is deprived of their British citizenship and then attempts to make a benefit claim, this claim will be rejected.  \n\nHome Office\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/archived/petitions/649686)","created_at":"2024-10-16T09:54:26.138Z","updated_at":"2025-01-07T17:45:34.865Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":324340,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/324340.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":"Extend Maternity Exemption Certificates","background":"Get maternity exemption certificates extended for those who have not been able to use them during the COVID lockdown.","additional_details":"Women who are entitled to free dental care and other benefits due to the maternity exemption certificates have been unable to use them due to the COVID closing dentists. Women’s teeth can deteriorate during pregnancy, so let’s get these certificates extended so women can benefit from the free dental care.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10089,"created_at":"2020-06-03T08:29:22.491Z","updated_at":"2021-12-15T15:53:48.937Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-07-28T07:42:03.646Z","closed_at":"2021-01-28T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-06-03T08:54:14.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-27T02:06:07.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-02-09T16:51:51.062Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-02-09","summary":"The Government has no plan to extend maternity exemption certificates. All NHS dentistry has been open from 8 June 2020. Pregnant women and new mothers are encouraged to access treatment as necessary.","details":"The Government has no plans to extend maternity exemption certificates. Pregnant women and new mothers who have given birth within the last 12 months are exempt from NHS dental charges. Whilst NHS dental practices were closed for face to face care during the first national lockdown period, practices continued to provide remote advice, analgesics and antibiotics. Urgent face to face care was provided from over 600 urgent dental care centres across the country, established by NHS England and Improvement regional commissioners.  Therefore, any urgent treatment a pregnant woman or new mother needed, during this period, should have been available.\n\nSince the 8th of June 2020, all NHS dental practices have been able to offer face to face care, supported by the urgent dental care centres that continue to remain open and supporting the provision of urgent care. NHS England and NHS Improvement have issued guidance setting out the priority order in which patients should be seen, focusing on urgent treatment, particularly for vulnerable groups, followed by routine care which is overdue. Anyone concerned with their oral health, including pregnant women and new mothers, should therefore contact their dental practice to access treatment. \n\nAcross England, a steady increase in dental activity has now been made possible following updated Prevention and Control guidance issued by Public Health England which has reduced the time needed to rest a room between patients. This has enabled NHS England and Improvement to set new targets for the level of activity provided by NHS dental contractors between 1 January and 31 March 2021. This is hoped to further increase the availability of vital NHS dental care for patients, reduce waiting times and address backlogs of dental care.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2021-02-09T16:51:51.060Z","updated_at":"2021-02-09T16:51:51.060Z"},"debate":null,"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":331350,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/331350.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":"Include Windrush generations in British Nationality Act Remedial Order","background":"The Government should expand the British Nationality Act Remedial Order to cover the Windrush generation and their descendants, as they have historic rights to apply to become British citizens.","additional_details":"The Immigration Act 1971 gave the Windrush Generation rights to live and work in the UK, and secure British citizenship, but many faced difficulties availing themselves of these rights due to the hostile environment that was implemented subsequently. The Government should extend the British Nationality Act Remedial Order to cover the Windrush generation and their descendants, to remove potential barriers from their securing British citizenship.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10059,"created_at":"2020-07-13T13:03:08.397Z","updated_at":"2021-02-11T00:00:04.998Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-08-10T14:23:09.450Z","closed_at":"2021-02-10T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-07-13T13:48:54.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-15T18:30:27.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-02-02T16:59:31.694Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-02-01","summary":"Most members of the Windrush generation and their direct descendants born in the UK are already British citizens or are entitled to register or naturalise as British citizens free of charge.","details":"The Immigration Act 1971 granted indefinite leave to remain to members of the Windrush generation that were settled in the UK on 1 January 1973.  This guaranteed in law their right to continue to permanently live and work in this country.  Some members of the Windrush generation subsequently had difficulties demonstrating their lawful status, and the Home Secretary has apologised unreservedly to victims and their families for the injustice, hardship and suffering they endured as a result.  \n\nThe Home Office’s priority has been to ensure that those who have struggled to demonstrate their status are supported to do so.  The Windrush Scheme was launched in May 2018, to support members of the Windrush generation and their children to obtain documentation confirming their right to live and work in the UK.  The Scheme also allows eligible individuals who are not yet British citizens to apply to register or naturalise as British citizens free of charge.  Such individuals are not required to take a Life in the UK test or obtain an English language qualification.  To the end of August, the Home Office had provided over 13,300 documents to over 11,500 people confirming their status or British citizenship.  \n\nUnder most circumstances, UK-born direct descendants of members of the Windrush generation will be British citizens automatically from birth, if born prior to 1 January 1983 or after 1 January 1983 to at least one parent that was settled in the UK at the time of their birth. This can include a parent with indefinite leave to remain granted by the Immigration Act 1971, or a descendant of such a person who also held indefinite leave to remain or was a British citizen.\n\nDue to historic legislation, a child born between 1 January 1983 and 30 June 2006 would only have acquired British citizenship through their father if their parents were married. The law changed on 1 July 2006 to allow a person to acquire citizenship through their father, irrespective of whether their parents were married. This change was not made retrospective, in part because some people born before 1 July 2006 would by then have acquired foreign citizenships. Their entitlement to such citizenships might have been put at risk if they were deemed to have always held British citizenship.\n\nAny person born prior to 1 July 2006, who would have become a British citizen automatically had their parents been married, may choose to register as a British citizen free of charge.  The British Nationality Act 1981 (Remedial) Order ensures any individuals in this position may register as British citizens without needing to meet the requirement to be of good character.  This includes eligible descendants of members of the Windrush generation. The Government therefore has no plans to extend the order.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2021-02-02T16:59:31.691Z","updated_at":"2021-02-02T16:59:31.691Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":649130,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/649130.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 for an immediate ceasefire in Israel and Gaza","background":"The Government must call for a ceasefire on both sides in Israel and Gaza. They must continue to call for the release of hostages, and call for the restoration of water, electricity and fuel to the people of Gaza.","additional_details":"To allow for humanitarian aid to enter Gaza, and the return of sanitation and emergency services to Gaza, thereby saving lives. To aid further diplomatic intervention and the prospective release of hostages, thereby saving lives. To prevent this from escalating into a wider regional conflict, which would have both local and global consequences, thereby saving lives.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10055,"created_at":"2023-10-16T15:06:10.901Z","updated_at":"2024-05-03T15:29:09.051Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-10-26T16:08:11.142Z","closed_at":"2024-04-26T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-16T17:26:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-04-20T09:21:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-05-03T15:26:02.263Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-05-03","summary":"The fastest way to end the conflict is to secure a deal which gets hostages out and allows for a pause in the fighting, then to work with partners to turn that into a sustainable, permanent ceasefire.","details":"The UK wants to bring the Gaza conflict to a sustainable end as quickly as possible.\n\nIsrael suffered an appalling terrorist attack on 7 October – the deadliest in its history. It has the right to defend itself in accordance with international humanitarian law. Hamas must release the hostages immediately. It should accept the deal that is on the table to do so.\n\nThe situation in Gaza is desperate. Too many Palestinian civilians have been killed and there is an urgent need to get more aid to the people of Gaza.\n\nThe fastest way to end the conflict is to secure a deal which gets the hostages out and allows for a pause in the fighting in Gaza.  We must then work with our international partners to turn that pause into a sustainable, permanent ceasefire.\n\nThe UK is doing all it can to reach a long-term solution to this crisis by: calling for the immediate release of all hostages; continuing to support a deal which would secure a pause in the fighting; pushing as hard as we can to get aid to Palestinian civilians; working with partners to deescalate the situation in the region; and building momentum towards a lasting peace.\n\nBuilding momentum towards a lasting peace will require the release of all hostages; removing Hamas’s capacity to launch attacks against Israel; Hamas no longer being in charge of Gaza; the formation of a new Palestinian Government for the West Bank and Gaza, accompanied by an international support package; and a political horizon for the Palestinians, providing a credible and irreversible pathway towards a two-state solution.\n\nThe UK is playing a leadership role in alleviating the suffering in Gaza. We more than trebled our aid commitment in the 2023-24 financial year and we are doing everything we can to get more aid in as quickly as possible by land, sea and air.\n\nOn 17 April we announced the UK is now providing £3 million of additional funding for equipment to support the UN and aid agencies at new and existing land crossings. In recent weeks, the Royal Air Force has conducted eight airdrops into Gaza. In addition, on 6 April, the UK announced a package of support to set up a maritime aid corridor to Gaza. A field hospital, provided by UK Aid funding to UK-Med, is up and running in Gaza and the facility, has already treated thousands of patients.\n\nIsrael has now committed to significant steps to increase the amount of aid getting to Gaza. Among other things, this includes approving activation of the Nachal Oz water pipeline to northern Gaza once repairs are completed.\n\nWe have seen an encouraging increase in the number of aid trucks getting into Gaza and some WFP food aid has now moved from Ashdod Port into Gaza, but we must see further action to ensure more aid actually gets over the border. Guaranteed deconfliction for aid convoys and other humanitarian work is also essential. \n\nForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office","created_at":"2024-05-03T15:26:02.260Z","updated_at":"2024-05-03T15:26:36.975Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":325300,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/325300.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":"Reimburse tax payers for monies used to compensate slave owners","background":"Issue a rebate of any monies used to pay off the debt that was taken out to pay slave owners as compensation for “loss of property”.","additional_details":"The UK abolished slavery in 1833 by agreeing to pay slave owners for ‘loss of property’ a total sum of £20m (worth billions today). This ‘debt’ was only paid off in 2015. Almost all of UK tax payers have contributed to this bill without their knowledge.\r\n\r\nThe biggest individual compensation went to John Gladstone (Prime Minister William Gladstone’s father) for 2,500 slaves, receiving the modern equivalent of £80m. We want our hard-earned money back.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10036,"created_at":"2020-06-07T12:28:25.838Z","updated_at":"2021-01-26T18:26:45.955Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-06-18T15:29:22.340Z","closed_at":"2020-12-18T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-06-07T12:32:34.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-18T18:50:17.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-01-26T18:26:30.705Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-01-26","summary":"The UK deplores the human suffering caused by slavery and the slave trade. These are among the most abhorrent chapters in the history of humanity","details":"The Government feels deep sorrow for the transatlantic slave trade, and it fully recognises the strong sense of public injustice about slavery. Refunding taxes is not practicable and would reduce the funding available for current public services. \n\nInstead, the Government believes we must look to the future and focus on the shared global challenges, working to address the reality of modern slavery in the UK and around the world. It is vital to ensure that slavery has no place in today’s world and that future generations do not forget what happened in the past. \n\nAccordingly, in addition to passing the Modern Slavery Act in 2015, the UK co-sponsored the UN resolution, initiated by Caribbean countries, to designate 25 March as an annual international day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.\n\nOn 14 June 2020, the Prime Minister pledged to establish a new Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities. This cross-government commission will examine all aspects of continuing racial and ethnic inequalities in Britain. The Commission aims to set out a new, positive agenda for change; balancing the needs of individuals, communities and society, maximising opportunities and ensuring fairness for all. The Commission will report in February 2021.\n\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2021-01-26T18:26:30.703Z","updated_at":"2021-01-26T18:26:30.703Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}}]}