{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?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":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions.json?page=2&parliament=4&state=with_response","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"archived-petition","id":554276,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/554276.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 child food poverty – no child should be going hungry","background":"Government should support vulnerable children & #endchildfoodpoverty by implementing 3 recommendations from the National Food Strategy to expand access to Free School Meals, provide meals & activities during holidays to stop holiday hunger & increase the value of and expand the Healthy Start scheme","additional_details":"Covid-19 has been tough on us all but Government should ensure children don’t pay the price:\r\n\r\n- 14% of parents & 10% of children have experienced food insecurity over the last 6 months\r\n- 32% of families have lost income as a result of Covid-19\r\n- Demand for food banks this winter is predicted to be 61% higher than last.\r\n\r\nWith the Child Food Poverty Taskforce, I am calling for Government to allocate money to\r\n\r\n- Expand free school meals to all under-16s where a parent or guardian is in receipt of Universal Credit or equivalent benefit\r\n- Provide meals & activities during all holidays\r\n- Increase the value of Healthy Start vouchers to at least £4.25 per week, and expand the scheme.\r\n\r\nThese 3 recommendations must be implemented without delay to #endchildfoodpoverty.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":1113889,"created_at":"2020-10-13T09:32:24.518Z","updated_at":"2024-12-27T14:53:09.762Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-10-14T16:04:25.496Z","closed_at":"2021-04-14T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-13T14:27:34.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-15T07:10:44.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-11-11T18:33:53.533Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-15T15:59:04.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-05-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-05-24","debate_outcome_at":"2021-05-25T14:56:13.260Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-11-11","summary":"We thank Marcus Rashford for highlighting the challenges facing families. On 8th November, the Government announced a comprehensive support package to help families through winter and beyond.","details":"Government have announced a comprehensive package of support to help families through the winter months, and beyond through the new Covid Winter Support grant, increasing the value of Healthy Start Vouchers and the national rollout of the Holiday Activities and Food programme for the longer holidays in 2021. \n\nWith Christmas coming, we want to give disadvantaged families peace of mind and help those who need it to have food on the table and other essentials so every child will be warm and well-fed this winter.\n\nThrough the Covid Winter Grant Scheme, we are delivering £170 million to local authorities in England starting in December to cover a period until the end of March. This fund builds on the £63 million already distributed earlier this year. This will allow councils to directly help the hardest-hit families and individuals, as well as provide food for children who need it over the holidays. Local councils understand which groups need support, and are best placed to ensure appropriate support is provided – which is why they will distribute the funds, rather than schools, who will continue providing meals for disadvantaged children during term-time.\n\nThe Holiday Activities and Food programme, which has provided healthy food and enriching activities to disadvantaged children since 2018, will also be expanded across England next year. It will cover Easter, Summer and Christmas in 2021, and cost up to £220 million. It will be available to children in every local authority in England, building on previous programmes – including this summers, which supported around 50,000 children across 17 local authorities.\n\nHealthy Start scheme payments are also set to increase from £3.10 to £4.25 a week from April 2021. This scheme supports pregnant women or those with children under four who have a low income and are in receipt of benefits to buy fresh fruit and vegetables. This will help people boost the long-term health of their children.\n\nThe Government has also pledged additional funding of £16 million for food distribution charities, with conversations with FareShare and others ongoing as to how this is allocated.\n\nExpand free school meals to all under-16s where a parent or guardian is in receipt of Universal Credit or equivalent benefit\n\n• Free school meals provide additional support to disadvantaged pupils, helping them to concentrate, learn and achieve whilst in school. We think it is important that this is targeted at those that need it most.\n\n• In 2018, Government introduced new eligibility criteria for families on Universal Credit, following a consultation in 2017.\n\n• It is estimated that this will be more generous in its reach by 2022, in comparison to the legacy benefit system.\n\n• Further to this we included generous protections, which mean any family transitioning to Universal Credit will continue to have access to a free school meal even if they move above the earnings threshold.\n\n• Universal Credit is a revolutionary benefit, which tapers away slowly as people increase their earnings, ensuring people are better off taking on more work.\n\n• Our analysis in 2018, estimated that extending eligibility to all families on Universal Credit would result in almost half of all school pupils becoming entitled to free school meals.\n\nProvide meals & activities during all holidays\n\n• Building on the significant support given to the most vulnerable during the pandemic, a new £170 million Covid Winter Grant Scheme will be run by councils in England. \n\n• We have supported thousands of young people through our summer Holiday Activities and Food programme, operating for the third year running. This will be expanded across England next year. It will cover Easter, Summer and Christmas in 2021, and cost up to £220 million.\n\n• We have taken substantial action to support children and their families including:\n\n* extending free school meals support to those eligible when schools were closed; \n\n* providing more than £380 million worth of supermarket vouchers to families and schools through our National Voucher Scheme and the Covid Summer Food Fund;\n\n* supporting our £35m breakfast club scheme to continue in schools in disadvantaged areas;\n\n* extending our welfare support by £9.3bn;\n\n* allocating £63m funding to local councils to provide emergency assistance to families with food and other essentials; and \n\n* increased the safety net with income protection schemes, mortgage holidays and support for renters.\n\nIncrease the value of Healthy Start vouchers to at least £4.25 per week, and expand the scheme.\n\n• The Healthy Start scheme payments are set to increase from £3.10 to £4.25 a week from April 2021.\n\n• The Healthy Start scheme provides important support for the people who use it.\n\n• The scheme provides a nutritional safety net to hundreds of thousands of lower income pregnant women and families with children under the age of four.  It encourages a healthy diet by providing vouchers that can only be spent on fresh, frozen or tinned fruit and vegetables, pulses, plain cow’s milk and infant formula, and provides access to Healthy Start vitamins for both pregnant women and children.\n\n• The Department of Health and Social Care made it easier for families to apply for and use the scheme during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Department removed the requirement for a health professional signature on the Healthy Start application form and has extended the validity period of the vouchers.\n\n• This supported people, for example pregnant women who are self-isolating, to apply for the scheme and reduced pressure on healthcare professionals. \n\nWe thank Marcus Rashford for the work he has done in highlighting the challenges families are facing as a result of the pandemic. \n\nWe are actively keeping all packages of support under review.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2020-11-11T18:33:53.531Z","updated_at":"2020-11-11T18:37:26.993Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-05-24","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2021-05-24/debates/B107A965-6D65-41D2-9F47-C6B24A1221B0/ChildFoodPoverty","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eI7ftNahIU","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0074/","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":619781,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/619781.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 to end the chaos of the current government","background":"Call an immediate general election so that the people can decide who should lead us through the unprecedented crises threatening the UK.","additional_details":"The chaos engulfing the UK government is unprecedented. Over 40 ministers resigned leaving departments without leadership during cost of living, energy and climate crises. War rages in Ukraine; the Northern Ireland Protocol has further damaged our relationship with Europe; recession looms; the UK itself may cease to exist as Scotland seeks independence. This is the greatest set of challenges we have seen in our lifetimes. Let the people decide who leads us through this turmoil.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":906624,"created_at":"2022-07-07T10:13:40.162Z","updated_at":"2023-11-14T10:45:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2022-07-14T13:28:37.202Z","closed_at":"2023-01-28T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2022-07-07T14:04:19.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2022-08-27T19:46:09.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-09-27T17:38:16.021Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2022-09-29T14:55:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2022-10-11","scheduled_debate_date":"2022-10-17","debate_outcome_at":"2022-10-18T06:47:17.155Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-09-20","summary":"The UK is a Parliamentary democracy and the Conservative Party remains the majority party. The Prime Minister has pledged to ensure opportunity and prosperity for all people and future generations.\r\n","details":"The United Kingdom is a Parliamentary democracy, not a Presidential one. Following the general election of December 2019, Members of Parliament of the governing party (the Conservative Party) were elected, such that there is a majority in the House of Commons. This remains the case. A change in the leader of the governing party does not trigger a general election – this has been the case under governments of successive political colours.\n\nThe Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022 provides that Parliament is automatically dissolved five years after it first meets (unless it is dissolved sooner), otherwise the timing is a matter of discretion for the incumbent Prime Minister (subject to re-established constitutional conventions).\n\nIn her speech of 6 September 2022, the new Prime Minister set out three early priorities: to grow Britain’s economy, deal with the energy crisis caused by Putin’s war, and putting the national health service on a firm footing. The Prime Minister is determined to address the challenges the country faces and ensure opportunity and prosperity for all people and future generations.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2022-09-27T17:38:16.018Z","updated_at":"2022-09-27T17:38:16.018Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2022-10-17","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-10-17/debates/78F30897-47A0-4D21-9135-DF1CD19E3AE4/EarlyGeneralElection","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMHQNKdbu-Q&list=PLj3mInRJqIemzke3yWcmPaR5ZTW4S4bur&index=2","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2022-0167/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":300336,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/300336.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 self-employed in statutory sick pay during Coronavirus","background":"4.8 million people are registered self-employed in the UK. Figures are of 2017 according to the Office of National Statisticics. It would be easy enough to work out what each person is entitled to based on their tax returns.\r\nInclude self-employed in statutory sick pay.","additional_details":"The self-employed make up 15% of UK's workforce. Majority are not entitled to any sick pay. I want the Government to include us in the recent changes to statutory sick pay because of the Corona19 virus. Excluding us means the Government are running the risk of said people continuing going to work as just like everyone else we have bills to pay and thus spreading the virus.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":699598,"created_at":"2020-03-04T19:23:37.962Z","updated_at":"2021-09-15T09:34:18.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-06T17:31:13.249Z","closed_at":"2020-09-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-04T20:39:14.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-08T15:29:34.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-03-27T09:16:31.981Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-10T13:55:34.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2020-07-29T10:53:36.363Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-03-26","summary":"It would not be appropriate to require the self-employed to pay themselves statutory sick pay, as they are their own employer. The welfare system provides a safety net to support the self-employed.","details":"Statutory Sick Pay is paid to an employee by an employer. Given self-employed people are their own employer, there is no logic for the government to require the self-employed to pay themselves statutory sick pay. \n\nThe Chancellor has outlined an unprecedented package of measures to protect millions of people’s jobs and incomes as part of the national effort in response to coronavirus. This includes strengthening the safety-net for the self-employed who will benefit from a relaxation of the earnings rules for self-employed claimants under universal credit and deferring income tax self-assessment payments due in July 2020.  \n\nDepending on their individual circumstances individuals can claim Universal Credit and/or new style Employment and Support Allowance. \n\nThey will benefit from changes we are making, such as the £20 increase in the UC standard allowance and the increases to the Local Housing Allowance. \n\nAnd we will temporarily relax the Minimum Income Floor for all self-employed UC claimants affected by the economic impact of Covid-19 from 6 April, for the duration of the outbreak.\n\nSelf-employed people unable to work because they are directly affected by Covid-19 or self-isolating will also be eligible for Contributory Employment and Support Allowance. As announced at Budget, this is now payable from the first day of sickness, rather than the eighth. \n\nAll these measures ensure that the self-employed are supported by the benefit system so that they can follow Public Health England guidance on social distancing and self-isolation.\n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions.","created_at":"2020-03-27T09:16:31.979Z","updated_at":"2020-03-27T09:16:41.164Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"Because it has not been possible to debate this petition to date and the request made by this petition has been considered by the Committee and in the House of Commons in other ways, the Committee has agreed not schedule this petition for debate.","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":575833,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/575833.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 verified ID a requirement for opening a social media account.","background":"Make it a legal requirement when opening a new social media account, to provide a verified form of ID. Where the account belongs to a person under the age of 18 verify the account with the ID of a parent/guardian, to prevent anonymised harmful activity, providing traceability if an offence occurs.","additional_details":"My son Harvey is disabled.  He is also the kind and gentle son of a person regularly in the public eye.  The Online Harms Bill doesn’t go far enough in making online abuse a specific criminal offence and doing what ‘Harvey’s Law’ intended. To make the law work needs the removal of anonymity to ensure that users cannot cause harm by using online platforms to abuse others.  Where an offence has taken place they ought to be easily identified and reported to the police and punished. We have experienced the worst kind of abuse towards my disabled son and want to make sure that no one can hide behind their crime.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":696955,"created_at":"2021-02-19T07:09:44.707Z","updated_at":"2023-05-11T12:55:29.202Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-03-05T11:05:39.783Z","closed_at":"2021-09-05T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-02-19T12:27:27.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-03-10T17:12:35.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-03-24T17:35:27.960Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-03-11T18:36:45.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2022-02-28","debate_outcome_at":"2022-03-01T08:08:35.795Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-05-05","summary":"The Online Safety legislation will address anonymous harmful activity. User ID verification for social media could disproportionately impact vulnerable users and interfere with freedom of expression.","details":"The government recognises concerns linked to anonymity online, which can sometimes be exploited by bad actors seeking to engage in harmful activity. However, restricting all users’ right to anonymity, by introducing compulsory user verification for social media, could disproportionately impact users who rely on anonymity to protect their identity. These users include young people exploring their gender or sexual identity, whistleblowers, journalists’ sources and victims of abuse. Introducing a new legal requirement, whereby only verified users can access social media, would force these users to disclose their identity and increase a risk of harm to their personal safety. \n\nFurthermore, users without ID, or users who are reliant on ID from family members, would experience a serious restriction of their online experience, freedom of expression and rights. Research from the Electoral Commission suggests that there are 3.5 million people in the UK who do not currently have access to a valid photo ID. \n\nThe online safety regulatory framework will have significant measures in place to tackle illegal and legal but harmful anonymous abuse. Services which host user-generated content or allow people to talk to others online will need to remove and limit the spread of illegal content, including criminal anonymous abuse. Major platforms will also need to set out clearly what legal anonymous content is acceptable on their platform and stick to it. The government will set out priority categories of legal but harmful material in secondary legislation. \n\nUsers will also be better able to report harmful content, and expect to receive an appropriate response from the company. This may include, for example, the removal of harmful content, or sanctions against offending users. Compliance with the online safety framework will be enforced by Ofcom, who will have a suite of powers to use against companies who fail to fulfil the duty of care. These include fines on companies - of up to £18m or 10% of annual global turnover - and business disruption measures. The Online Safety Bill, which will give effect to the regulatory framework outlined in the full government response, will be ready this year.\n\nProtecting children is at the heart of our plans to transform the online experience for people in the UK and the strongest protections in this framework will be for children. All companies in scope will be required to assess whether children are likely to access their services, and if so, provide additional protections for them. They will be required to assess the nature and level of risk of their service specifically for children, identify and implement proportionate mitigations to protect children, and monitor these for effectiveness. We expect companies to use age assurance or age verification technologies to prevent children from accessing services which pose the highest risk of harm and to provide children with an age appropriate experience when using their service.\n\nThe police already have a range of legal powers to identify individuals who attempt to use anonymity to escape sanctions for online harms, where the activity is illegal. The government is also working with law enforcement to review whether the current powers are sufficient to tackle illegal anonymous abuse online. The outcome of that work will inform the government’s future position in relation to illegal anonymous online abuse. \n\nThe Government has also asked the Law Commission to review existing legislation on abusive and harmful communications. The Law Commission has consulted on proposed reforms and a final report is expected in the summer. We will carefully consider using the online harms legislation to bring the Law Commission’s final recommendations into law, where it is necessary and appropriate to do so.\n\nAnonymity underpins people’s fundamental right to express themselves and access information online in a liberal democracy. Introducing a new legal requirement for user verification on social media would unfairly restrict this right and force vulnerable users to disclose their identity. The Online Safety legislation will address harmful anonymised activities online and introduce robust measures to improve the safety of all users online.\n\nDepartment for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport\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/575833","created_at":"2021-03-24T17:35:27.958Z","updated_at":"2021-05-18T14:30:12.332Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2022-02-28","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-02-28/debates/1368BEBE-4B60-4247-B0E2-48D9B8A84472/OnlineAbuse","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_eyMIEc564","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8743/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":300403,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/300403.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":"Close Schools/Colleges down for an appropriate amount of time amidst COVID19.","background":"We would like the government to at least consider closing schools/colleges down in the coming weeks or as soon as possible, in addition to taking necessary actions to prevent further spread.","additional_details":"We would like the Government or Parliament to enforce this action due to the growing fear among parents and students that attend school. The ability to focus or concentrate is affected in addition to the growing fears of the Corona-virus. In our view, the government and health officials around the world are more 'reactive' rather than 'proactive'. This will result in more spread as time is given for the virus to do so. We hope to come to an agreement as soon as possible in a timely manner.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":685394,"created_at":"2020-03-05T09:21:19.141Z","updated_at":"2025-08-06T08:58:49.830Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-06T16:40:55.588Z","closed_at":"2020-09-06T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-05T09:31:04.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-06T18:26:34.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-03-30T16:21:49.087Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-07T00:02:44.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2020-07-29T10:47:52.538Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-03-30","summary":"Schools closed by the end of the day on Friday 20 March. Affecting schools, colleges, and early years settings in England, except for children of critical workers and the most vulnerable children. ","details":"The first aim of the school closure measures set out by the Secretary of State for Education is to reduce the number of children moving around local areas as far as possible, in order to further reduce the number of social interactions and thus flatten the upward curve of the Covid-19 outbreak. \n\nThe second aim is to continue to care for children whose parents are critical to the Covid-19 response, so that they can continue to work. This includes those who work in the health and social care sectors as well as those critical to continuing to provide essential services such as transport, food and delivery, utilities, communications and public safety. \n\nIn addition to this, schools will continue to care for the most vulnerable children. Vulnerable children include those who have a social worker and those with Education, Health and Care Plans – a legal document that describes a child’s special educational needs and the support they require.\n\nChildren who do not fall into these groups have been advised to stay at home with appropriate care to limit the spread of the virus, protect the NHS and save lives. \n\nThe DfE is working closely with colleagues across Government to ensure that all appropriate arrangements, and support, are in place for all DfE sectors – from early years and childcare to schools and children’s social care. The DfE is also in regular discussions with sector bodies and unions, and we will continue to work together on current and emerging issues. We will ensure students, parents and staff are kept up to date. \n\nThe advice from Public Health England is that it remains safe for small numbers of children and staff to attend schools, colleges and childcare settings. Decisions on future advice to schools will be taken based on the latest and best scientific evidence.\n\nDepartment for Education.","created_at":"2020-03-30T16:21:49.085Z","updated_at":"2020-03-30T16:22:51.431Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"Because it has not been possible to debate this petition to date, and the request made by the petition was acted on by the Government and has been considered by the Committee in other ways, the Committee has agreed not schedule this petition for debate.","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":333869,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/333869.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":"Prevent gyms closing due to a spike in Covid 19 cases","background":"In the event of a spike we would like you not to close gyms as a measure to stop any spread of Covid. Also for gyms to not be put in the same group as pubs in terms of risk or importance. Gyms are following strict guidelines and most members are following rules in a sober manner.","additional_details":"The gyms are a huge benefit for users, not just physically but mentally too. There are studies that show physical exercise can be a great boost to the immune system and releases endorphins which can prevent stress and a chain of mental illnesses. In such a stressful time people need a viable way to exercise. Using home equipment just isn’t sufficient, unless every person in the UK has hundreds of pounds to pay out on equipment (much of which has increased in price since the pandemic).","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":621440,"created_at":"2020-08-04T17:41:48.388Z","updated_at":"2022-03-04T14:58:55.720Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-08-12T15:01:00.306Z","closed_at":"2021-02-12T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-08-04T18:04:44.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-12T18:44:44.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-10-28T15:15:42.560Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-14T10:32:24.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2020-11-17","scheduled_debate_date":"2020-11-23","debate_outcome_at":"2020-11-24T14:08:17.932Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-10-28","summary":"Sports and physical activity facilities are crucial for adults and children to stay active. The Government’s phased approach is based on scientific and medical advice to protect public health.","details":"Sports and physical activity are incredibly important for our physical and mental health, and are a vital weapon against coronavirus. That’s why we made sure that people could exercise at least once a day even during the height of lockdown - and why we opened up grassroots sport and leisure facilities as soon as it was safe to do so. Outdoor swimming pools have been able to open from 11 July, and from 25 July indoor gyms, leisure centres (including sports halls) and swimming pools in England were able to reopen. However, we have always made clear that we will adopt a phased approach to reopening based on scientific and medical advice, with the primary goal of protecting public health. \n\nSports and physical activity providers and facilities are at the heart of our communities, and play a crucial role in supporting adults and children to be active. On 22 October, the Government announced a £100m support fund for local authority leisure centres. In addition, Sport England’s Community Emergency Fund is providing £210 million directly to support community sport clubs and exercise centres through this pandemic. We are continuing to work at pace across government to ensure the sector has the support it needs to continue delivering their central role in helping people be active.\n\nOn 11 October, the Prime Minister announced further measures on social contact to manage local outbreaks.  Organised outdoor sport, licensed outdoor physical activity and outdoor exercise classes are still exempt from the rule of 6, and can happen in any number. Indoor sport and exercise classes can also continue, in line with the social contact rules in your local area. These new restrictions are necessary as we continue to fight the virus, and we continue to work across the government to make sure the sector has the support it needs throughout this pandemic. \n\nAs part of these measures a three tier COVID system for England was announced which set out different rules for regions classified as being on ‘medium’, ‘high’, or ‘very high’ alert. The closure of gyms and leisure centres is not part of the baseline measures that will automatically apply for Very High Level restrictions.  However, it remains one of the options open to local authorities to go beyond the baseline restrictions in place for areas under the Very High alert level. I welcome the news that gyms and leisure centres that were previously closed in Liverpool due to its very high alert level are now allowed to re-open from Friday 23 October.\n\nFor areas in this level we will work with local leaders to agree a fuller package of measures going beyond the baseline measures, specific to that area’s situation. These schemes will be co-designed between the local authority and central government. \n\nDepartment for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2020-10-28T15:15:42.559Z","updated_at":"2020-10-28T15:15:42.559Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2020-11-23","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-11-23/debates/27F99AA4-313E-49C1-B3F2-60D639BD1762/Covid-19RestrictionsOnGymsAndSport","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuszxeH6rX8","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2020-0153/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":643611,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/643611.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":"Bad owners are to blame not the breed - don't ban the XL bully","background":" \r\nI believe that the XL bully is a kind, beautiful natured breed that loves children and people in general, and are very loyal and loving pets.\r\n","additional_details":"An XL bully is a \"Heinz 57\", a mixture of different breeds, so if you ban them then this will have implications for cross breeds of dog because nobody can be sure on the breed specifics. They are all different sizes and shapes. Just because a dog is big and muscular doesn't mean it can be labelled an XL bully, it is unfair to do this.\r\n \r\nIt is also a well-known fact that how a dog acts is a reflection of the owner's actions. Bad owners should be punished, not the breed of dog – hold bad owners accountable.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":621046,"created_at":"2023-09-11T00:35:49.537Z","updated_at":"2024-10-19T05:47:26.459Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-09-13T15:42:34.874Z","closed_at":"2024-03-13T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-11T19:20:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-15T12:03:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-11-23T14:48:43.193Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-09-15T17:29:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2023-10-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2023-11-27","debate_outcome_at":"2023-11-29T18:29:58.907Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-11-23","summary":"Following a concerning rise in attacks and fatalities caused by XL Bully type dogs, the Government has added this breed to the list of dogs banned under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.","details":"We recognise that some people are opposed to the Government’s decision to add the ‘XL Bully’ to the list of types of dog prohibited under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991. However, the Government has a responsibility to maintain public safety. \n\nXL Bully dogs are large, muscular animals which can be difficult to control due to their size and cause serious injury. We have seen an increase in dog attacks in recent years, including those causing injuries and fatalities, with the XL Bully being disproportionally involved in this rise. As a result, we have taken decisive action to add XL Bully breed types to the list of breeds prohibited by the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991.  We firmly believe that this approach is needed to reduce the risks to the public from this type.\n\nThe Government has acted quickly to develop a definition for the XL Bully so the breed type can be banned in law. We convened a group of experts to define the physical characteristics of the breed type. This included representatives from the police, local authorities, devolved administrations and animal welfare experts. We believe the definition correctly captures dogs of this breed type. We recognise that there are other established breeds such as those recognised by the UK Kennel Club that may meet some of the characteristics of the XL Bully breed type. These are not within scope of the ban. This definition and guidance can be found on the government's website, here: Official definition of an XL Bully dog: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/official-definition-of-an-xl-bully-dog/official-definition-of-an-xl-bully-dog\n\nFrom 31 December 2023 all owners of XL Bully breed types must comply with strict conditions. Breeding, selling, exchanging, gifting, abandoning or allowing these dogs to stray will be banned. Owners will also be required to keep their dog on a lead and muzzled in public. We are encouraging all owners to start training their dogs to wear a muzzle and walk on a lead now, ahead of the restrictions coming into force on 31 December 2023. \n\nFrom 1 February 2024 it will be a criminal offence to be in possession of an XL Bully in England and Wales, unless owners have a Certificate of Exemption. Further details on how to apply will be provided in due course. Owners will need to adhere to strict rules including holding public liability insurance and for the dog to be microchipped and neutered. Dogs that are less than one year old on 31 January 2024, will need to be neutered by 31 December 2024. Dogs that are older than one year old on 31 January 2024, must be neutered by 30 June 2024. We recommend that owners arrange for their dogs to be neutered as soon as possible to meet these deadlines.\n\nAlternatively, where owners do not wish to keep their dogs, they can choose to euthanise them. Government will pay a contribution of £200 towards the costs associated with euthanasia where this takes place before 1 February 2024.  Further details on how to apply for compensation will be provided soon. \n\nWhile the evidence of numerous attacks has meant that we have had to act to ban this particular breed type, we also recognise that responsible dog ownership is vital across all breeds of dog. Owners whose dogs are dangerously out of control are already breaking the law, and we already have a full range of powers to apply penalties to them. Under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, any dog that is dangerously out of control can be euthanised and their owners put in prison for up to 14 years and be banned from ever owning a dog.\n\nWe have been working hard with the police, local authorities and animal welfare groups to help prevent attacks by encouraging responsible dog ownership, to ensure dog control issues are addressed before they escalate and to make sure the full force of the law is applied.\n\nAs part of this work, we are also considering the role of education and training (for both dogs and their owners) in reducing the risk of dog attacks, as well as considering how we can improve data collection and recording and enforcement practices.  \n\nThese steps address all aspects of tackling irresponsible dog ownership effectively, from prevention to robust, consistent enforcement, focussing on owners as well as on their dogs. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2023-11-23T14:48:43.190Z","updated_at":"2023-11-23T14:56:57.242Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2023-11-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-11-27/debates/49A1227C-38F7-4C1B-A2A6-479FDD708494/LegislationOnDangerousDogs","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFis4ZFozUM&t=1s","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9897/","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":550344,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/550344.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":"Reduce University student tuition fees from £9250 to £3000","background":"Call on the government to consider holding debates in Parliament between MPs and university students to raise/discuss issues that affect them. It will allow students to voice their opinions and concerns about tuition fees of £9250 a year which are too high, particularly as grants have been removed","additional_details":"Higher education is the key for our nation’s future, live Parliament debates involving MPs and students are crucial to give them the opportunity to raise the issues of concern in particular reducing University student fees & other matters impacting their lives including accommodation costs. The debates should include university students, post graduates, those from poorer backgrounds and disabilities also college students. Covid-19 has left the nation’s future economy/job market uncertain","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":581287,"created_at":"2020-09-05T14:12:36.919Z","updated_at":"2021-11-01T18:04:29.039Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-10-05T13:27:03.798Z","closed_at":"2021-04-05T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-06T15:42:14.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-05T13:38:27.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-01-26T19:38:16.543Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-05T17:16:27.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-10-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-10-25","debate_outcome_at":"2021-10-27T07:24:00.415Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-01-26","summary":"Tuition fee levels must represent value for money and ensure that universities are properly funded. Government is not considering a reduction in maximum fee levels to £3,000.","details":"This is a difficult time for students and Government supports the desire of everyone in higher education (HE) that students continue receiving the best possible learning experience, while recognising the wide range of issues that have arisen from the pandemic.\n\nStudents have made their voice heard through a range of e-petitions over the past year. Government’s responses to previous petitions on fee refunds can be read here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/302855 and here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/324762. The Petitions Committee held an inquiry into the impact of Covid-19 on students, and Parliament debated its impact on students on 16 November 2020. This can be viewed at https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/324762. Students may engage with the democratic process further by writing to their MP.\n\nRegarding tuition fee levels, this Government is committed to a sustainable funding model that supports high-quality provision, meets the skills needs of the country and maintains the world-class reputation of UK HE.\n\nThe maximum tuition fee cap has been frozen for four years and will remain at £9,250 in 2021/22 for standard full-time courses. HE providers are autonomous and responsible for setting their own fees under this level. In deciding to keep charging full fees, providers will want to ensure that they can continue to deliver courses which are fit for purpose and help students progress their qualifications. The Office for Students (OfS) has made it clear that HE providers must continue to comply with registration conditions relating to quality and academic standards, which set out requirements to ensure that courses are high-quality, that students are supported and achieve good outcomes and that standards are protected, regardless of whether a provider is delivering its courses through face-to-face teaching, online learning, or a combination of both.\n\nThe OfS is taking very seriously the potential impacts of the pandemic on teaching and learning and is regularly engaging with all registered providers. It is actively monitoring providers to ensure that they maintain the quality of their provision; that it is accessible for all; and that they have been clear in their communications with students about how arrangements for teaching and learning may change throughout the year. If students have concerns about the quality of online tuition, they should first raise their concerns with their university.  If their concerns remain unresolved, students at providers in England or Wales can ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education to consider their complaint.\n\nThe Government pays tuition fees upfront on behalf of eligible students, through a system of subsidised loans, and the student loan repayment system provides unique protections to borrowers. Borrowers with post-2012 undergraduate loans pay back 9% of earnings above the repayment threshold, currently £26,575 per year (rising to £27,295 in April). Repayments are linked to income, not to the amount borrowed, and if a borrower’s income drops, so do their repayments. Any unpaid loan is written off after 30 years at no detriment to the individual.\n\nWe recognise that in these exceptional circumstances some students may be facing considerable financial hardship, and we encourage universities and private landlords to review their accommodation policies to ensure they are fair, clear and have students’ interests at heart. The Department for Education has worked with the OfS to clarify that HE providers are able to use existing funds, worth around £256 million for academic year 2020/21, towards hardship support. The Government has recently made available up to £20m of further hardship funding on a one-off basis to support those that need it most, particularly disadvantaged students, and cross-government work is continuing to consider what additional support can be provided. Government plays no role in the provision of student residential accommodation.\n\nLoans for living costs are available as a contribution towards a student’s living costs while attending university. The system targets the most support at those from the lowest-income families. Students undertaking courses that would normally require attendance on-site, but for which learning has moved either fully or partially online due to Covid-19, will qualify for living costs support in 2020/21 as they would ordinarily. Students who suspend their studies for a variety of reasons, including shielding, can apply for their living costs support to be continued while they are absent from their course. Students in receipt of a living costs loan who have been awarded a lower amount than the maximum can apply for their entitlement to be reassessed, if they believe that their household income for the current tax year will drop by at least 15% compared to the amount they advised when they were initially assessed.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2021-01-26T19:38:16.541Z","updated_at":"2021-01-26T19:38:16.541Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-10-25","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-10-25/debates/E3056725-2E5F-4D6B-BA9C-1AA40B3116EF/UniversityTuitionFees","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfdjm8FYeYU","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0169/","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":554316,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/554316.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":"Prioritise teachers, school and childcare staff for Covid-19 vaccination","background":"Advice from the JCVI on the priority groups for a Covid-19 vaccine does not include school/childcare workers. This petition calls for these workers, who cannot distance or use PPE, to be kept safe at work by being put on the vaccine priority list when such a list is adopted into government policy.","additional_details":"Inclusion of school and childcare staff on the priority list should also: \r\n* provide more protection for children and their families \r\n* reduce the chance of settings being closed for 2 weeks and working parents having to take time off work \r\n* ensure continuity of education for children \r\n* allow schools to return to normality faster, having a positive impact on children’s mental health \r\n* reduce the chance of NHS workers having to stay at home with children who are isolating due to closures","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":508830,"created_at":"2020-10-13T13:02:52.173Z","updated_at":"2023-11-03T14:26:08.505Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-10-20T09:39:40.616Z","closed_at":"2021-04-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-13T13:29:14.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-18T14:28:57.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-01-21T12:37:26.055Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-23T09:20:47.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-01-06","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-01-11","debate_outcome_at":"2021-01-12T11:26:43.556Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-02-23","summary":"The government is working hard to ensure everyone who is prioritised based on clinical risk, as set out by the JCVI receives a COVID-19 vaccine as soon as reasonably possible.","details":"The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) is the independent medical and scientific expert body who advise the UK Government on prioritisation for all vaccines. The committee’s membership is made up of practising clinicians and scientists, as well as individuals from academia who consider the impact of COVID-19 and provide advice on prioritisation of a COVID-19 vaccine in the population.\n\nFor phase one of the vaccine roll-out, the underlying principles at the forefront of the JCVI advice are to reduce mortality and morbidity, and to protect the NHS and social care systems, including the frontline staff working in these areas. Given the current epidemiological situation in the UK, all evidence indicates that the best option for preventing mortality in the initial phase of the programme is to directly protect persons most at risk.\n\nHaving identified age as being the biggest determining risk factor to increased mortality, COVID-19 vaccinations have been prioritised to care home residents and staff and those over 80, followed by health and social care workers, then to the rest of the population in order of age and clinical risk factors. Further information on prioritisation can be found via the following link: www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-green-book-chapter-14a. If a teacher, school or childcare worker is identified as being in one of the at-risk cohorts, they will be contacted by the NHS at the appropriate time based on JCVI advice. It is estimated that when phase one concludes by the end of Spring 2021, twenty-five million people will have been offered the COVID-19 vaccine.\n\nTo enable this to happen, the National Health Service (NHS) has been working alongside its health and social care partners to ensure vaccinations can be administered safely and effectively as part of the largest vaccination programme undertaken in its history. Following months of comprehensive planning, more than 250 hospital hubs, 1,028 GP-led local vaccination services, 130 high street pharmacies and 50 large-scale vaccination centres are currently in operation across England. This has been a monumental effort by all those involved which has allowed over 9 million of the highest priority individuals to receive their first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine to date.\n\nAs the COVID-19 vaccine programme continues to grow, the government continues to follow the scientific and expert advice. As such, there are currently no plans to deviate from the advice set out by the JCVI and prioritise teachers, school or childcare staff during the first phase of deployment unless these individuals are over 50 or have an underlying health condition which place them in priority cohorts 1-9.\n\nLooking ahead, the JCVI continues to collect and analyse data in order to best inform the advice it provides the government. Further data and advice from the JCVI will inform the next steps going forward in preparation for Phase Two of the roll-out of the COVID Vaccination programme.  The Department of Health and Social Care will work with the NHS, independent experts and other partners to best implement this.\n\nEnsuring the safety of children, the education and childcare workforce and families is our overriding priority.  We continue to update our guidance to help the childcare sector provide a safe and secure environment for children and staff. To deliver on these aims and to support full re-opening we are rolling out our asymptomatic testing programme to staff in primary and nursery schools, whilst over 90% of secondary schools have now registered for rapid testing. As a result of the brilliant efforts schools and colleges are making to deliver testing it is hoped this will help break the chains of transmission of the COVID-19 virus and support a return to face-to-face education.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care\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/554316)","created_at":"2021-01-21T12:37:26.053Z","updated_at":"2021-02-23T14:45:36.147Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-01-11","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-01-11/debates/36A217D4-671E-4CA0-BF78-4ED3ADDFB346/Covid-19VaccinationRoll-Out","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCVSCSm7N6o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0007/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":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":550846,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/550846.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":"Reclose schools and colleges due to increase in COVID-19 cases","background":"Close down schools and colleges due to the increase in COVID-19 cases. We are seeing cases of students and teachers catching the virus since schools have reopened.","additional_details":"To protect teachers and pupils and their families.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":428789,"created_at":"2020-09-10T20:47:41.490Z","updated_at":"2021-12-13T18:56:08.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-09-22T10:43:40.402Z","closed_at":"2021-03-22T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-10T21:47:24.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-10-31T19:52:47.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-11-27T12:05:18.821Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-11-01T16:45:57.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2020-12-03","scheduled_debate_date":"2020-12-07","debate_outcome_at":"2020-12-08T14:02:30.153Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-11-25","summary":"Government’s priority is that all pupils remain in school and college full-time. For the vast majority of young people, the benefits of being in the classroom far outweigh the low risk from COVID-19.","details":"Attending school and college is vital for children and young people’s education and for their wellbeing. Time out of school or college is detrimental for children’s and young people’s cognitive and academic development, particularly for disadvantaged children and young people. This impact can affect both current levels of learning and children’s and young people’s future ability to learn.\n\nSchools and colleges have been open to all students since the start of the autumn term. On average, over 99% of schools are open each day and  99% of Further Education colleges have been open each week. Approximately 89% of pupils on roll were in attendance in state-funded schools as of 5 November.\n\nThe risk to children and young people themselves of becoming severely ill from coronavirus (COVID-19) is very low and there are negative health impacts of being out of school or college. Senior clinicians, including the Chief Medical Officers of all four nations, still advise that school is the very best place for children and young people to be, and so they should continue to attend. We have taken a national decision to prioritise education during the current period of national restrictions in order to avoid any further reduction in face to face education for children and young people.\n\nSchools and colleges have implemented a range of protective measures to minimise risk of transmission.\n\nWe published guidance to support schools (1*) and colleges (2*) to welcome back all children and young people from the start of the autumn term. Our guidance for schools and colleges sets out measures which provide a framework for school and college leaders to put in place proportionate protective measures for children, young people and staff, which also ensure that all students receive a high quality education and training that enables them to thrive and progress. This includes the public health advice schools and colleges must follow to minimise the risks of coronavirus (COVID-19) transmission.\n\nThe measures set out in the department’s guidance to minimise the risk of transmission in schools and colleges has been endorsed by Public Health England. The measures in place include regular handwashing, promoting good respiratory hygiene, keeping groups separate and maintaining distance and minimising contact between individuals.\n\nSchools and colleges must ensure they understand the NHS Test and Trace process. Anyone who displays symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19) can and should get a test. Essential workers, which includes anyone involved in education or childcare, have priority access to testing.\n\nThere is reassuring evidence from recent ONS data that school and college staff are not at higher risk than those working in other sectors. On 31 October the Prime Minister announced new national restrictions during the period of 5 November to 2 December to control the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19). In line with these restrictions, staff who are clinically extremely vulnerable are advised to work from home and not to go into work. Staff should talk to their employers about how they will be supported, including to work from home where possible, during the period of national restrictions.\n\nMore evidence has emerged that shows there is a very low risk of children and young people becoming very unwell from coronavirus (COVID-19), even for children and young people with existing health conditions. Most children and young people originally identified as clinically extremely vulnerable no longer need to follow original shielding advice. Children and young people who live with someone who is clinically extremely vulnerable, but who are not clinically extremely vulnerable themselves, should still attend education. Those children and young people whose doctors have confirmed they are still clinically extremely vulnerable are advised not to attend education whilst the national restrictions are in place (3*).\n\nIf parents have concerns about their child or young person attending school or college because they consider they or members of their household may have particular risk factors, they should discuss these with their school or college.\n\nWe will continue to keep the evidence, particularly on the transmission rate and wider risks on health, under review so that we can continue to support schools to remain open and provide the education that children deserve.\n\n(1*)https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/actions-for-schools-during-the-coronavirus-outbreak/guidance-for-full-opening-schools\n\n(2*)https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-maintaining-further-education-provision/what-fe-colleges-and-providers-will-need-to-do-from-the-start-of-the-2020-autumn-term\n\n(3*)https://www.gov.uk/guidance/education-and-childcare-settings-new-national-restrictions-from-5-november-2020#schools\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2020-11-27T12:05:18.818Z","updated_at":"2020-11-27T12:06:02.795Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2020-12-07","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-12-07/debates/4FFF63BD-3E7E-4CD6-A1B1-1A8400F88AD8/Covid-19ImpactOnSchoolsAndExams","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r7ECc92V3g&feature=youtu.be","debate_pack_url":"","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":301397,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/301397.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":"Implement UK lockdown for preventing spread of COVID19","background":"The UK needs to follow suit the containment procedures of countries that have been greatly affected by COVID19 such as Italy.\r\n\r\nThe UK should restrict unnecessary travel between towns and cities. Travel permitted should only be for work or emergencies. Public gatherings should also be discouraged.","additional_details":"It is time the government should prioritise the health of the public and should consider how vital it is to implement effective containment now.\r\n\r\nIt is better to spend money to contain the virus and treating the relatively low numbers who are ill now rather than wait for more casualties.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":409474,"created_at":"2020-03-11T00:16:42.594Z","updated_at":"2021-10-01T17:55:48.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-12T16:54:59.310Z","closed_at":"2020-09-12T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-11T13:44:24.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-13T10:32:54.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-03-19T18:04:26.234Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-14T10:57:34.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2020-07-29T10:59:57.752Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-03-19","summary":"We understand the public’s concern and are doing everything we can to combat the outbreak. We will continue to evolve our response based on the latest and best scientific and medical advice.","details":"It is absolutely critical in managing the spread of this virus that we take the right decisions at the right time, based on the best evidence available. \n\nOn 3 March, the Government launched its coronavirus (COVID-19) action plan: www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-action-plan/coronavirus-action-plan-a-guide-to-what-you-can-expect-across-the-uk. This plan has two overriding aims: to protect the NHS by building it up and flattening the curve of coronavirus cases; and to protect life by safe guarding those who are most vulnerable. \n\nSince this petition started the Government has made a number of significant announcements which are set out below. We will continue to adapt the response to follow the best scientific advice.\n\nOn 16 March Secretary of State for Health Matt Hancock announced a ‘Stay at Home’ policy. This is a social-distancing model for the general public with more home-working and less social interaction. \n\nGuidance on social distancing for everyone in the UK and protecting older people and vulnerable adults has been published on gov.uk: www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-on-social-distancing-and-for-vulnerable-people/guidance-on-social-distancing-for-everyone-in-the-uk-and-protecting-older-people-and-vulnerable-adults.\n\nThis guidance is particularly important for people over 70 years old, pregnant women, and those with some health conditions. It advises on the social distancing measures we should all take to reduce our social interaction in order to reduce the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19): \n\nAvoid contact with someone who is displaying symptoms of coronavirus (COVID-19). These symptoms include high temperature and/or new and continuous cough\n\nAvoid non-essential use of public transport, varying your travel times to avoid rush hour, when possible\n\nWork from home, where possible. Your employer should support you to do this. Please refer to employer guidance for more information\n\nAvoid large gatherings, and gatherings in smaller public spaces such as pubs, cinemas, restaurants, theatres, bars, clubs\n\nAvoid gatherings with friends and family. Keep in touch using remote technology such as phone, internet, and social media\n\nUse telephone or online services to contact your GP or other essential services\n\nEveryone should be trying to follow these measures as much as is pragmatic. \n\nThe Government advises those who are at increased risk of severe illness from coronavirus (COVID-19) to be particularly stringent in following social distancing measures. This group includes those who are: \n\naged 70 or older (regardless of medical conditions)\n\nunder 70 with an underlying health condition listed below (ie anyone instructed to get a flu jab as an adult each year on medical grounds):\n\nchronic (long-term) respiratory diseases, such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema or bronchitis \nchronic heart disease, such as heart failure \nchronic kidney disease\nchronic liver disease, such as hepatitis \nchronic neurological conditions, such as Parkinson’s disease, motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis (MS), a learning disability or cerebral palsy\ndiabetes\nproblems with your spleen – for example, sickle cell disease or if you have had your spleen removed\na weakened immune system as the result of conditions such as HIV and AIDS, or medicines such as steroid tablets or chemotherapy \nbeing seriously overweight (a body mass index (BMI) of 40 or above)\nthose who are pregnant\n\nThere are some clinical conditions which put people at even higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19. The NHS in England will directly contact those who are in this category. \n\nPeople falling into this group are those who may be at particular risk due to complex health problems such as:\n\npeople who have received an organ transplant and remain on ongoing immunosuppression medication\n\npeople with cancer who are undergoing active chemotherapy or radiotherapy\n\npeople with cancers of the blood or bone marrow such as leukaemia who are at any stage of treatment\n\npeople with severe chest conditions such as cystic fibrosis or severe asthma (requiring hospital admissions or courses of steroid tablets)\n\npeople with severe diseases of body systems, such as severe kidney disease (dialysis)\n\nThe Government will shortly start a ‘shielding’ approach for the 1.4 million most vulnerable people in our community. \n\nOn 17 March the Foreign and Commonwealth updated their travel advice, advising against all non-essential international travel, initially for a period of 30 days. This reflects the pace at which other countries are either closing their borders or implementing restrictive measures. \n\nOn 19 March the Government will introduce the Coronavirus Emergency Bill which will grant the power to keep essential services running. \n\nThese measures will be disruptive, but the Government believes they will save lives.\n\nTackling coronavirus is a national effort: thank you for the part you are playing. \n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care.","created_at":"2020-03-19T18:04:26.231Z","updated_at":"2020-03-19T18:05:14.859Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"Because it has not been possible to debate this petition to date, and the issues raised by this petition have been acted on by the Government and considered by the Committee and in the House of Commons in other ways, the Committee has agreed not schedule this petition for debate.","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":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":585314,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/585314.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 sanctions against Israel","background":"The Government should introduce sanctions against Israel, including blocking all trade, and in particular arms.","additional_details":"Its disproportionate treatment of Palestinians and settlements that are regarded by the international community as illegal are an affront to civilised society.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":388518,"created_at":"2021-05-08T11:49:27.377Z","updated_at":"2023-12-20T16:32:25.085Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-05-14T07:27:52.070Z","closed_at":"2021-11-14T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-05-08T12:48:35.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-05-14T19:48:45.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-06-08T09:54:04.349Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-05-15T10:45:45.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-05-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-06-14","debate_outcome_at":"2021-06-15T07:54:11.350Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-06-08","summary":"The UK is firmly opposed to boycotts or sanctions against Israel. Our close and varied relationship means we are able to express clearly when we disagree.","details":"HM Government has made its position on sanctions clear. While we do not hesitate to express disagreement with Israel whenever we feel it necessary, we are firmly opposed to boycotts or sanctions. We believe that open and honest discussions, rather than the imposition of sanctions or supporting anti-Israeli boycotts, best supports our efforts to help progress the peace process and achieve a negotiated solution.\n\nHM Government takes its export control responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust arms export control regimes in the world. We consider all export applications thoroughly against a strict risk assessment framework. We continue to monitor the situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories and keep all licences under careful and continual review as standard. \n\nThe UK welcomed the recent announcement of a ceasefire in Israel and Gaza on 20 May, which is an important step to ending the cycle of violence and loss of civilian life. During the Foreign Secretary’s visit to the region on 26 May he reiterated the UK’s firm commitment to the two-state solution as the best way to permanently end the occupation, deliver Palestinian self-determination and preserve Israel’s security and democratic identity. The UK will continue our intensive diplomatic efforts in the region, focussed on creating the conditions for a sustainable peace.\n\nIsrael is an important strategic partner for the UK and we collaborate on issues of defence and security. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unwavering. The UK unequivocally condemns the firing of rockets at Jerusalem and locations within Israel. We strongly condemn these acts of terrorism by Hamas and other terrorist groups, who must permanently end their incitement and rocket fire against Israel. We are also concerned by reports that Hamas is again using civilian infrastructure and populations as cover for its military operations.\n\nWe are clear that all countries, including Israel, have a legitimate right to self-defence, and the right to defend their citizens from attack. In doing so, it is vital that all actions are proportionate, in line with International Humanitarian Law, and are calibrated to avoid civilian casualties.\n\nThe UK is strongly opposed to the Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions Movement against Israel, just as we oppose any calls for boycotts which divide people and reduce understanding.\n\nThe UK position on evictions, demolitions, and settlements is longstanding and clear. We oppose these activities. We urge the Government of Israel to cease its policies related to settlement expansion immediately, and instead work towards a two state solution. Settlements are illegal under international law, and present an obstacle to peace. We want to see a contiguous West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as part of a viable and sovereign Palestinian state, based on 1967 borders. Our position was reflected in our support for UN Security Council Resolution 2334 and we continue to urge Israel at the highest level to halt settlement expansion immediately.\n\nWe advise British businesses to bear in mind the British Government's view on the illegality of settlements under international law when considering their investments and activities in the region. Ultimately, it will be the decision of an individual or company whether to operate in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, but the British Government would neither encourage nor offer support to such activity.\n\nWe have also made clear our concerns about the increasing rate of demolitions and evictions of Palestinians. The UK is focused on preventing demolitions and evictions from happening in the first place through our legal aid programme, which supports Palestinians facing demolition or home eviction.\n\nAs a strong friend of Israel, and one which has stood up for Israel when it faces bias and unreasonable criticism, we are continuing to urge Israel to not take steps such as these, which move us away from our shared goals of peace and security.\n\nThe occupation will not end and peace will not be achieved by symbolic measures, but by real movement towards renewed peace negotiations which create a viable Palestinian state, living in peace and security side-by-side with Israel. We will continue to press Israel and the Palestinians strongly on the need to refrain from taking actions, which make peace more difficult. And will continue to encourage further confidence building steps towards meaningful bilateral peace negotiations between the parties.\n\nForeign, Commonwealth & Development Office","created_at":"2021-06-08T09:54:04.345Z","updated_at":"2021-06-08T09:54:04.345Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-06-14","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-06-14/debates/1DA741DA-7D79-4FB1-A769-6B81320154BC/IsraelAndPalestine","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTQbtpYkZJM","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0085","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":569957,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/569957.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 rollout Covid-19 vaccine passports","background":"We want the Government to commit to not rolling out any e-vaccination status/immunity passport to the British public. Such passports could be used to restrict the rights of people who have refused a Covid-19 vaccine, which would be unacceptable.","additional_details":"On Dec 14th 2020, Nadhim Zahawi MP said 'there are no plans for vaccine passports'. He continues to deny the Government has plans despite reports that people who have received the Covid-19 vaccine will be offered a passport proving they have been vaccinated as part of a government-funded trial.\r\n \r\nThe Government must be completely clear to the public about the use of vaccine passports & their intentions, which will undoubtedly affect societal cohesion & effect the economic recovery of Great Britain this year & into 2022.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":375208,"created_at":"2021-01-13T14:18:34.955Z","updated_at":"2022-03-04T14:58:44.219Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-01-20T17:35:51.250Z","closed_at":"2021-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-13T14:35:47.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-24T10:36:17.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-03-04T13:18:34.364Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-02-14T08:49:47.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2021-03-15","debate_outcome_at":"2021-03-17T09:00:59.727Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-03-03","summary":"The Government is reviewing whether COVID-status certificates could play a role in reopening parts of our economy, reducing restrictions on social contact and improving safety.","details":"The Government is reviewing whether COVID-status certificates could play a role in reopening parts of our economy, reducing restrictions on social contact and improving safety.\n\nAs set out in the roadmap by the Prime Minister, this review will include assessing to what extent certification would be effective in reducing risk, and the potential uses to enable access to settings or a relaxation of COVID-Secure mitigations. The Government will also consider the ethical, equalities, privacy, legal and operational aspects of this approach and what limits, if any, should be placed on organisations using certification. It will draw on external advice to develop recommendations that take into account any social and economic impacts, and implications for disproportionately impacted groups and individuals’ privacy and security. The Government will set out its conclusions in advance of Step 4 in order to inform the safe reopening of society and the economy.\n\nAs the Prime Minister has said, there are complex ethical issues - and we can't discriminate against people who, for whatever reason, haven't had a vaccine.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2021-03-04T13:18:34.362Z","updated_at":"2021-03-04T13:18:34.362Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-03-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-03-15/debates/8D4B8782-7BA5-475B-A48A-370859B78209/VaccinePassports","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtJqyDyuqhE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0038/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":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":590282,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/590282.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 the UK a Bank Holiday on Monday July 12th if England win Euro 2020","background":"England may be playing a European Championship Final at 8pm on Sunday 11th July. It would be beneficial and sensible to give the country the day off the next day if England win, in the form of an extra Bank Holiday Monday.","additional_details":"Sunday 8pm is a difficult time for families to plan to be together for the event - knowing we have an additional day off the next day would significantly help this. Furthermore, a historic win should be celebrated. It would be expected for the winning team to parade the trophy, and a Bank Holiday would be a perfect time to do this. Also, English people would naturally want to continue to enjoy the win, giving the retail and leisure industry a much-needed opportunity to make up lost revenues.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":364822,"created_at":"2021-06-30T09:01:23.069Z","updated_at":"2023-01-23T15:57:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-07-06T10:34:26.537Z","closed_at":"2022-01-06T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-06-30T09:08:55.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-07-08T05:39:05.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-07-22T10:24:01.204Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-07-08T12:21:35.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2021-07-15T17:46:37.415Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-07-22","summary":"The Government would like to congratulate the England team on its sterling performance in the UEFA Euro 2020 Final. However, the Government has no plans for a bank holiday.","details":"The Government appreciates how England’s performance at Euro 2020 has united and inspired the nation, particularly in light of the incredibly difficult times endured during the pandemic. We are extremely proud of the England team’s success.\n\nThe Government regularly receives requests for additional bank and public holidays to celebrate a variety of occasions.  However, the current pattern is well established and accepted. \nThere are eight permanent bank and public holidays in England and Wales. There are nine in Scotland and ten in Northern Ireland. \n\nWhile an additional bank holiday may benefit some communities and sectors, the overall cost to the economy is considerable.  The most recent estimate – from the impact assessment for the additional holiday for the Diamond Jubilee in 2012 - is that a bank holiday (across the UK) costs the economy around £1.2bn. The extra costs to certain businesses are substantial.  \n\nFull-time workers in the UK are entitled to 28 days statutory paid holiday each year. However, many workers are likely to have to work on bank holidays due to their contractual arrangements. Legislation does not give employees a right to time off or extra pay on bank holidays. \n\nShort notice bank holidays can also have implications across the public sector which need to be taken into consideration, such as:\n\n• Benefit payments falling on the bank holiday would have to be rescheduled, which may lead to backlogs and hardship for claimants.\n\n• Disruption to health and social care services and cancellation of scheduled operations and treatments, of which there is already a backlog due to Covid-19.\n\n• Courts and tribunals would have to postpone hearings. Due to the way that listings are managed, these may have to be pushed back by more than a single day, leading to longer delays.\n\n• Children would require an additional day out of school, having already missed a significant number of days due to the pandemic. \n\nFor these reasons, the Government has no plans to create a one-off bank holiday for this occasion.\n\nDepartment for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy","created_at":"2021-07-22T10:24:01.200Z","updated_at":"2021-07-22T10:24:38.456Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"The Petitions Committee has decided not to schedule a debate on this petition.  The Committee considered the petition at its meeting on 13 July 2021. \r\n\r\nGareth Southgate and all of the members of the England team did the country proud, but sadly they didn’t win Euro 2020, so the request of this petition isn't something that needs to be debated.\r\n\r\nThis petition was the most popular petition on petition.parliament.uk in the run up to the final. It was great to see the support that fans had for the team, and the outpouring of support for the players in the days after. ","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":302855,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/302855.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 all students of this year’s fees due to strikes and COVID-19","background":"All students should be reimbursed of this years tuition fees as universities are now online only due to COVID-19, with only powerpoints online for learning materials which is not worthy of up to £9,250. Furthermore, all assessments are being reconsidered to ‘make do’ and build up credits.","additional_details":"Field trips have also been cancelled which our tuition fee was to pay for. There is also no need for accommodation which students have paid between £4,000-£8,000 for in advance and adding to their student debt. Lastly, the extended strikes of this year have severely disrupted student-staff interaction and personalised help, with staff not replying to emails or available for meetings. Grading is also being delayed. Overall, university quality is poor this year and certainly not worth up to £9,250.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":353129,"created_at":"2020-03-14T22:47:08.102Z","updated_at":"2022-01-06T14:29:45.642Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-03-23T16:38:48.290Z","closed_at":"2020-09-23T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-14T23:23:34.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-24T07:10:24.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-04-16T11:43:59.251Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-03-24T14:46:04.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2020-10-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2020-11-16","debate_outcome_at":"2020-11-17T09:41:10.901Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-06-05","summary":"HE providers must deliver high quality courses.\r\nIf students are unhappy they should first complain to their provider and if their concerns are unresolved they can ask OIA to consider their complaint.","details":"Government recognises the challenges facing students and supports them in their desire to continue receiving the best possible learning experience from our higher education (HE) providers. We consider it in the best interests of all students that they receive a high-quality online education during this unprecedented period that allows them to progress and to complete their studies within the time period they had been anticipating.\n\nThere are some fantastic and innovative examples of high-quality online learning being delivered by HE providers across the country, and the sector is working hard to provide and prepare learning materials for the summer and autumn terms. Universities are autonomous and responsible for setting their own fees. In deciding to keep charging full fees, universities will of course want to ensure that they can continue to deliver courses which are fit for purpose and help students progress their qualifications. Any refund is a matter for universities, so we are not considering a write off of tuition fee loans.\n\nWe believe that students should be at the heart of the HE system. The Office for Students (OfS), the regulator in England, has committed to protecting students throughout the present crisis and has published guidance for registered providers on how it will approach the regulation of quality and standards, and this includes practical ways in which students can complete their studies whilst ensuring quality and standards are upheld. Providers are already making these arrangements and the Government is in continuous contact with the sector to support the continuation of teaching and assessment. The Government is also working closely with the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education to ensure students continue to leave HE with qualifications that have real value, reflect their hard work and allow people to progress. \n\nThe Government’s clear expectation is that HE providers should make all reasonable efforts to enable students to complete their studies. If providers are unable to facilitate good online tuition, they should seek to avoid charging students for any additional terms they may need to undergo as a consequence – avoiding effectively charging them twice. Whether or not an individual student is entitled to a refund of fees will depend on the specific contractual arrangements between the provider and student. \n\nIt is important that students continue to receive a good standard of education, and they are entitled to make a complaint if they feel that their HE provider has not taken sufficient steps to appropriately respond to this situation. In the first instance, students should speak to their provider to see if they can resolve their complaint. We expect student complaints and appeals processes to be operated flexibly, accessibly, and sympathetically by providers to resolve any concerns. If a student at a provider in England or Wales is not satisfied with their provider’s response, they can ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) to consider their complaint. \n\nGovernment also understands that it may be difficult for some students to finish their current year of study for personal reasons, and that this will undoubtedly be a source of concern to many. Where students are unable to complete their current year of study or need to repeat a year due to compelling personal reasons, they may be eligible for an additional year of fee loan support above their standard entitlement under existing arrangements. \n\nFinally, Government appreciates the difficult situation facing students who are renting term-time accommodation. We encourage universities and private hall providers to be fair in their decisions about rent charges for this period. A number of large companies have waived rents for the summer term or released students early from their contracts. Students who are tenants with individual private landlords should discuss the possibility of an early release from their tenancy agreement. The Government has also worked with the OfS so that existing funds, totalling £46m across April and May, can now be used to boost providers’ hardship funds for students in financial difficulty. This can include help for IT equipment and internet access, and may be helpful for students who are struggling with housing costs or loss of income from part-time work.\n\nGovernment has previously responded to a petition concerning compensation for strike action at universities. The response to this petition can be found here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/300528 \n\nDepartment for Education \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/302855)","created_at":"2020-04-16T11:43:59.249Z","updated_at":"2020-06-05T12:23:14.048Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2020-11-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-11-16/debates/7BF8890F-3E72-44BC-B260-49E74D0B91C7/TuitionFees","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n7QzDAmzck","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2020-0132/","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":575801,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/575801.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":"Outlaw discrimination against those who do not get a Covid-19 vaccination","background":"The individual must remain sovereign over their own body, discrimination against those who cannot or will not be vaccinated against COVID is incompatible with a free democracy. The Government must take firm action to prevent 'vaccination passports' and discriminatory 'no jab, no job' policies.","additional_details":"The Government must specifically outlaw discrimination based on vaccine status, this includes access to private businesses, jobs and public life. No individual should ever feel coerced into having a vaccine.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":347512,"created_at":"2021-02-18T21:57:52.006Z","updated_at":"2022-03-04T14:58:37.684Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-02-24T17:28:57.574Z","closed_at":"2021-08-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-02-19T22:02:57.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-04-07T19:23:25.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-04-29T15:55:35.448Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-07-20T10:13:05.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-09-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-09-20","debate_outcome_at":"2021-09-21T06:38:31.018Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-04-29","summary":"The Government believes that COVID-status certification could have a role to play in the reopening of society. We are considering carefully the equality and ethical concerns in an ongoing review.","details":"The Government has committed to explore whether and how COVID status certification might be used to reopen our economy, reduce restrictions on social contact and improve safety.\n\nAs part of this, the Government is conducting a COVID-Status Certification Review. This has so far gathered evidence from clinical and ethical experts, as well as businesses and their representative organisations. In addition, the public call for evidence has generated over 50,000 responses, representing a wide range of opinions.\n\nThe Roadmap Reviews Update, published on 5 April 2021, provided an update on the COVID-Status Certification Review. This publication can be sourced here: \n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-response-spring-2021-reviews-terms-of-reference/roadmap-reviews-update\n\nThe Government believes that COVID-status certification could have an important role to play both domestically and internationally, as a temporary measure. Equally, the Government wants to be sure that the benefits of any such approach are fully interrogated in public debate and that the deliverability of COVID-status certification is rigorously tested. The Government also wants to analyse the potential economic impacts that COVID-status certification would have across different settings. We will continue to gather evidence on the extent to which COVID-status certification is an effective measure to control the pandemic, reducing hospitalisations and deaths.\n\nThe Government believes that there are some settings (such as essential public services, public transport and essential shops) where COVID-status certification should never be required, in order to ensure access for all.\n\nIt is possible that COVID-status certification could also play a role in reducing social distancing requirements in other settings which people tend to visit more frequently (for example, in hospitality settings). However, the Government recognises this has significant implications for businesses and their customers, This will be further considered in consultation with industry, as part of the review of social distancing rules, and taking into account the equalities and other impacts. For now, businesses should continue to plan to reopen in a way that follows the latest COVID-secure guidance, and certification will not be required for reopening as part of step 2 or step 3.\n\nIn addition to the Roadmap Reviews Update, the Government has presented an interim update to Parliament (29 April). The Government will set out its conclusions ahead of Step 4.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2021-04-29T15:55:35.445Z","updated_at":"2021-04-29T15:56:04.144Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-09-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-09-20/debates/A52729B6-FB5D-498F-86E4-569024C22623/Covid-19Vaccinations","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7_2B4d48PU&feature=youtu.be","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/coronavirus/coronavirus-vaccination/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":323442,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/323442.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":"Prevent any restrictions on those who refuse a Covid-19 vaccination","background":"I want the Government to prevent any restrictions being placed on those who refuse to have any potential Covid-19 vaccine. This includes restrictions on travel, social events, such as concerts or sports. No restrictions whatsoever.","additional_details":"You cannot force someone to have a vaccination, and should not be able to coerce them into it by way of restrictions. We have to the right to assess the risk ourselves as we have done in the past.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":337144,"created_at":"2020-05-28T18:33:48.011Z","updated_at":"2022-03-04T14:59:02.550Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-08-04T15:27:09.326Z","closed_at":"2021-02-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-05-28T18:38:54.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-08-05T20:50:04.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-09-14T13:05:03.729Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-08-29T06:13:04.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2020-12-03","scheduled_debate_date":"2020-12-14","debate_outcome_at":"2020-12-15T12:17:39.856Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-09-11","summary":"There are currently no plans to place restrictions on those who refuse to have any potential Covid-19 vaccine.","details":"After clean water, vaccination is the most effective and crucial public health intervention, and a cornerstone of public health that we must not take for granted. It is vital that a significant proportion of people who are offered take up a Covid-19 vaccine in order to protect themselves as well as other vulnerable individuals. Averting a second wave is a key priority for the government and high take up of a vaccine when available will greatly contribute to that. \n\nImmunisations save thousands of lives every year by preventing outbreaks of serious infectious diseases and, in cases such as smallpox and polio, eliminating diseases in the UK altogether. Since the introduction of the measles vaccine in 1968, it is estimated that 20 million cases and 4,500 deaths have been averted in the UK. From 1970 to 2017, it is estimated that rubella vaccination has averted 1,300 babies being born with congenital rubella syndrome and 25,000 terminations. With further innovation and the development of new vaccines, even more lives could be saved. \n\nWe believe it is everyone’s responsibility to do the right thing for their own health, and for the benefit of the wider community. There are currently no plans to introduce a Covid-19 vaccine in a way that penalises those who do not take up the vaccine. However, the Government will carefully consider all options to improve vaccination rates, should that be necessary.\n\nThe UK has a world class national immunisation programme which is constantly reviewed and updated to reflect the changing nature of infectious diseases and provide the best protection for the public. All vaccines used in the UK are thoroughly tested, meet strict safety criteria and are carefully monitored after they are introduced into the national programme. Our evidence-based immunisation programmes are informed by the advice of our work leading expert committee – the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which reviews a wide range of scientific and other evidence, keeping the vaccine schedule safe and relevant. \n\nImmunisation offers everyone a chance at a healthy life from the earliest beginnings and into old age. It saves millions of lives every year and is widely recognised as one of the world’s most successful and cost-effective health interventions. High uptake of a Covid-19 vaccine is the best way we have, to protect our health, our jobs, and our economy at large.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2020-09-14T13:05:03.726Z","updated_at":"2020-09-14T13:05:03.726Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2020-12-14","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-12-14/debates/782DBCA8-620D-473C-A8CB-CCB9C0F78DF5/Covid-19Vaccination","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6juJ_nd73Tw&feature=youtu.be","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":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":601583,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/601583.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 Clause 9 from the Nationality and Borders Bill","background":"Under provisions in Clause 9 of this Bill, individuals could be stripped of their British citizenship without warning. We believe this is unacceptable, and inconsistent with international human rights obligations.","additional_details":"Clause 9 of the bill, “Notice of decision to deprive a person of citizenship,” which was updated earlier this month, exempts the Government from having to give notice if it is not “reasonably practicable” to do so, or in the interests of national security, diplomatic relations or is otherwise in the public interest.\r\n \r\nWe believe these provisions should be removed before this Bill is enacted.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":327103,"created_at":"2021-11-19T12:05:29.221Z","updated_at":"2024-04-24T09:44:47.686Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-11-29T08:09:46.943Z","closed_at":"2022-05-29T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2021-11-19T13:15:28.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2021-12-07T19:02:38.000Z","government_response_at":"2022-01-05T12:38:34.135Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-12-10T07:44:48.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2022-03-25T12:02:05.575Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2022-01-05","summary":"The Government will not remove Clause 9. It is necessary to ensure deprivation powers can be used effectively and will only apply in very limited circumstances. It does not affect the right to appeal.","details":"Clause 9 of the Nationality and Borders Bill removes the requirement to give notice of a decision to deprive a person of citizenship in certain limited circumstances. The clause also has retrospective effect so that where a decision to deprive has already been made but not notified to the person, the deprivation order stemming from that decision remains valid. This provision strikes the right balance between the rights of the individual and the aims of the policy to keep the public safe.\n\nThe Government recognises that to deprive someone of British citizenship is a very serious matter and it is a power reserved for those whose conduct poses a threat to the UK, involves very high harm, or where citizenship has been obtained by fraudulent means and so the person was never entitled to it in the first place. Deprivation on ‘conducive to the public good’ grounds is rare, has been possible for over a century, comes with a right of appeal and is used against people like terrorists to keep the public safe. Such decisions are therefore made following careful consideration of advice from officials and lawyers and in accordance with domestic and international law as well as the UN Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. Clause 9 doesn’t change any of that. It is simply about how someone is notified. It cannot be right that the proper functioning of the immigration and nationality system is impeded because an individual has removed themselves from contact with the Home Office, or they are in a war zone where they cannot be contacted, or where to make contact would disclose sensitive intelligence sources.  \n\nThis clause is therefore necessary to avoid the situation where we could never deprive a person of their British citizenship just because it is not practicable, or not possible, to communicate with them. Preserving the ability to make decisions in this way is vitally important to preserve the integrity of the UK immigration system and to protect the security of the UK from those who would wish to do us harm. \n\nHowever, the Government wishes to make clear that it does not intend to deny a person their statutory right of appeal where a decision to deprive has been made. The amendment to section 40A of the British Nationality Act 1981 preserves the right of appeal in cases where the notice of a decision to deprive has not been given to the person as their current whereabouts are unknown. Once a person makes contact with the Home Office, they are given a copy of the deprivation decision notice. They can then seek to exercise their statutory right to appeal against that decision. \n\nThe Government is not extending deprivation powers through the inclusion of this measure and is not denying a person their statutory right of appeal where a decision to deprive has been made. The proposed amendment preserves this right. The change is simply intended to ensure existing powers can be used effectively in all appropriate circumstances and does not in any way represent a policy change in this important area of work.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2022-01-05T12:38:34.133Z","updated_at":"2022-01-05T12:38:34.133Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"The Petitions Committee has decided not to schedule a debate on this petition.\r\n\r\nThe Committee recognised the support that this petition has received. However, the request of this petition has already been considered by MPs through the legislative process.\r\n\r\nFollow progress of the Nationality and Borders Bill: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3023","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":560216,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/560216.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 dog theft a specific criminal offence","background":"The Government should create a specific offence for dog theft, with 8 years minimum sentencing and a fine of at least £5,000. Dogs are like members of the family to many people and current laws do not reflect this. Dogs are a support network for so many, a family member, a lifeline.","additional_details":"There have been reports of substantial increases in dog theft in recent months, with the most loyal of animals torn away from its family. Thieves think it’s all too easy and the punishment can be nothing compared to the gain with a shocking minority of dogs being reunited with their families.\r\nDog theft is not currently a specific offence and the crime of theft carries a sentence of up to seven years according to the Theft Act 1968, but this doesn’t target the specific problem which is dog theft.\r\n \r\nDogs should be seen to have their own offence to protect them. Current laws and penalties are not enough justice for the families and dogs that go through this trauma. They protect us, so we will protect them.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":316545,"created_at":"2020-11-12T06:18:39.286Z","updated_at":"2024-01-25T12:08:57.715Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-11-20T17:14:04.974Z","closed_at":"2021-05-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-11-12T10:16:37.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-19T19:29:37.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-01-21T12:54:42.100Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2021-01-05T19:23:47.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2021-09-21T16:35:02.062Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-01-20","summary":"Current court sentencing guidelines for theft already take into account the emotional distress that theft of a family pet can have on owners, and already recommend higher penalties for such offences.","details":"We understand the emotional trauma which the theft of a much-loved dog can cause. All reported crimes should be taken seriously, investigated and, where appropriate, taken through the courts and met with tough sentences.\n\nThe theft of a dog is already a criminal offence under the Theft Act 1968 and the maximum penalty is seven years’ imprisonment.\n\nIf someone causes an animal to suffer in the course of stealing it from its owner, then they are liable to prosecution under the Animal Welfare Act 2006. The existing maximum custodial penalty for causing animal cruelty is 6 months’ imprisonment. However, there is legislation before Parliament – the Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill – which when passed will increase the maximum penalty to 5 years’ imprisonment. This will be the highest penalty for animal cruelty in Europe. The Government will support this Bill as it makes its way through Parliament.\n\nSentencing is entirely a matter for our independent courts and must take into account the circumstances of each case. When deciding on an appropriate sentence, the courts consider any aggravating and mitigating factors, in line with sentencing guidelines issued by the Sentencing Council. In February 2016 the Sentencing Council updated its guidelines in relation to sentencing for theft offences. The guidelines take account of the emotional distress, and therefore harm, that theft of a pet can have on the victim, and accordingly recommends higher penalties for such offences.\n\nWhile the Government takes the issue of dog theft very seriously and is concerned by suggestions that occurrences are on the rise, we consider the legislative tools we have in place to deal with cases of dog theft to be robust and proportionate. However, as Victoria Prentis MP said on behalf of the Government at the recent Westminster Hall debate on pet theft, we continue to keep things under review and are keen to explore ways to address the issue that will be effective and have a meaningful impact on the problem at hand. That includes working with interested parties, including the police and animal welfare organisations to try and get messages across to the pet owners to help them keep their pets safe.\n\nIt is important to raise awareness of precautions that owners can take to reduce risk of dog theft and increase the chances of owners being reunited with lost or stolen dogs. For dog owners this includes never letting their pet out of sight when it is being exercised; varying their routines when walking their dogs and not leaving their dog unattended when in public.\n\nThe law requires that dogs must be microchipped, and their details recorded on a database. Since we made microchipping compulsory, the proportion of dogs microchipped has gone up from around 58% of all dogs in 2013 to over 90% of all dogs. This means that about 8.5 million dogs in the United Kingdom are microchipped. We have also committed to introducing compulsory cat microchipping.\n\nOwners should report the theft of their dog to the database on which the animal’s microchip is registered, along with the corresponding crime reference number. There is a much better chance that dogs who become lost or stolen will be returned to their owners if they are microchipped and their records kept up to date. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2021-01-21T12:54:42.097Z","updated_at":"2021-01-21T12:54:42.097Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"The Petitions Committee has decided not to schedule a debate on this petition.\r\n\r\nThey have agreed not to schedule a debate on this petition as the central request of the petition is being met with the Government’s announcement of plans to introduce a specific criminal offence of pet abduction, which the Petitions Committee has itself supported calls for, following a number of petitions on this issue. The Committee also debated a similar petition in October 2020.\r\n\r\nOn Friday 3 September 2021, the Government announced plans to introduce a specific criminal offence of pet abduction, along the lines called for in the petition you signed.\r\n\r\nYou can read the Government's announcement here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pet-abduction-to-be-made-new-criminal-offence-in-crackdown-on-pet-theft\r\n\r\nAfter writing to the Government supporting calls for a specific offence of pet theft, the Petitions Committee debated pet theft in October 2020, in response to another petition calling for this to be made a specific criminal offence.\r\n\r\nRead the Committee's letter calling for pet theft to be made a specific offence: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/1502/documents/13678/default/\r\n\r\nAnd read the Government's response: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/2185/documents/20152/default/\r\n\r\nYou can read a transcript of the debate from 20 October 2020 here: https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-10-19/debates/7DB00823-5B7F-452D-8F36-B857FEDE682B/PetTheft\r\n\r\nYou can also watch the debate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRtSMPH_zuc","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":319891,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/319891.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":"Limit the Sale and Use of Fireworks to Organisers of Licensed Displays Only","background":"Current legislation allows for public use of fireworks 16 hours a day, every day, making it impossible for vulnerable groups to take precautions against the distress they can cause. Better enforcement of existing law is insufficient; limiting their sale & use to licensed displays only is necessary.","additional_details":"Restrictions on the sale & use of fireworks has huge public support and is backed by several human and animal charities. Limiting the sale & use of fireworks to displays only, by introducing licensing via local authorities, would help to protect vulnerable people and animals from the distress and anxiety caused by unexpected firework noise & pollution. Legislation that balances people’s desires for firework displays, and individual rights to not be distressed throughout the year, is needed now.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":301611,"created_at":"2020-05-08T13:59:43.344Z","updated_at":"2021-12-21T13:51:48.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-07-21T11:40:18.060Z","closed_at":"2021-01-21T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-05-08T15:16:04.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-07-23T06:09:44.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-08-13T14:23:15.766Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-11-05T21:33:37.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2021-11-02","scheduled_debate_date":"2021-11-08","debate_outcome_at":"2021-11-09T12:38:30.942Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-08-13","summary":"The Petitions Committee inquiry in 2019 concluded that it would not be appropriate for the Government to ban the public use of fireworks.","details":"Last year, the Petitions Committee carried out an extensive inquiry into fireworks, which ran from February to November 2019. The Committee asked for evidence on the balance and effectiveness of existing legislation, the role and safety of public and private displays, and the needs of particular groups (such as veterans and people with disabilities), and animals. They received written and oral evidence representing a range of stakeholders, including from members of the public, representative bodies, organisations and charities, all with varying views on fireworks.\n\nThe Committee’s final report, published on 5 November 2019, concluded that they could not support a ban on the public buying and using fireworks. Their reasoning for no further legislative action was:\n\nThe likely effects on community groups and their local fundraising efforts;\n\nThe concerns about ineffectiveness of a ban and resulting unintended and counter-productive consequences for public safety;\n\nThe substantial economic effect a ban would have, in particular, on those who have built their livelihoods on the fireworks industry.\n\nWe agree with the conclusion of the Petitions Committee. In the Government’s response to the Committee, we also agreed that a ban could have the unintended consequence of pushing the market underground, driving individuals to source fireworks from illegitimate or unsafe suppliers. A ban could also prove detrimental to communities for cultural or financial reasons.\n\nNevertheless, the Government has committed to take further action to promote the safe and considerate use of fireworks and our actions will include:\n\nDeveloping a public awareness campaign on the safe use of fireworks; \n\nEngaging with animal charities to further discuss their work related to animal welfare issues; \n\nEngaging with Local Authorities to understand the issues they face with regard to fireworks; \n\nEngaging with the fireworks industry to discuss any additional action they might take to address the concerns raised around fireworks packaging appealing to underage individuals.\n\nThese actions show that the Government has been listening to the concerns that have been raised about fireworks and that work is continuing.\n\nDepartment for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy","created_at":"2020-08-13T14:23:15.764Z","updated_at":"2020-08-13T14:23:15.764Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-11-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2021-11-08/debates/E3C6762B-B81D-462E-95C1-6EAA2030A63E/FireworksSaleAndUse","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WN-o7RyDzZw","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2021-0183/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[],"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":563294,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/563294.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":"Seek Europe-wide Visa-free work permit for Touring professionals and Artists","background":"We would like the UK Govt to negotiate a free cultural work permit that gives us visa free travel throughout the 27 EU states for music touring professionals, bands, musicians, artists, TV and sports celebrities that tour the EU to perform shows and events & Carnet exception for touring equipment.","additional_details":"The UK has a huge music / event touring industry which has suffered immensely due to Covid. After the end of the transition period, we face further hardship when trying to tour the EU on a professional basis, with potentially each country asking for its own visa, that would be valid only for one trip, As a freelancer I and many like me travel through the EU countless times a year on different tours and events, this will become impossible due to cost and time if we do not have visa free travel.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":286797,"created_at":"2020-12-09T08:01:02.263Z","updated_at":"2024-02-20T16:46:28.008Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-12-22T14:07:49.393Z","closed_at":"2021-06-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-09T11:22:27.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-27T19:12:47.000Z","government_response_at":"2021-01-14T16:49:30.911Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-12-28T16:37:17.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":"2021-02-08","debate_outcome_at":"2021-02-10T09:54:14.190Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2021-01-14","summary":"During our negotiations, we proposed measures to allow creative professionals to travel and perform in both the UK and EU, without needing work-permits. Unfortunately, the EU rejected these proposals.","details":"The UK Government supports ambitious arrangements for performers and artists to be able to work and tour across Europe. In the negotiations with the EU, we were determined to get a good deal for British music because we recognise the value of this industry.\n\nAs negotiations began, we consulted extensively with the sector to find out what they needed from the negotiations. We listened to the experts in British music, including bodies like the Musicians Union, and reflected their views in our proposal to the EU.\n\nDuring our negotiations with the EU, we sought a mutually beneficial agreement that would have allowed performers to continue performing across the continent without the need for work permits. Specifically, we proposed to capture the work done by musicians, artists and entertainers, and their accompanying staff through the list of permitted activities for short-term business visitors. This was a straightforward solution for our creative industries which would have benefited all sides.\n\nThe EU turned down our proposals on the basis that musicians were providing a service which they viewed as necessitating a work permit and/or visa. \n\nThis outcome is regrettable, however there is scope to return to this issue in the future should the EU change its mind. Meanwhile the UK Government will make the case for arrangements that make touring easier in the EU and also seek to signpost to guidance which will help UK business travelers navigate individual Member States’ immigration systems.\n\nThe UK remains open for musicians to tour here. Musicians and artists (and technical staff) traveling to the UK from non-visa national countries, which includes but is not limited to EU nationals, are able to carry out a number of activities relating to the music and touring industry without a visa. Visiting musicians to the UK may perform at events, make personal appearances, take part in competitions, promotional activities and auditions, for up to 6 months without the need for formal sponsorship or a visa if they are not being paid beyond expenses or prize money. They can also receive payment for appearances at permit free festivals for up to 6 months, or for up to one month for a specific engagement. Musicians and support staff who are being paid in the UK may also qualify for entry under the Tier 5 Creative Worker route, if they are sponsored by a UK entity licensed with UK Visas and Immigration for this purpose. Entry is for up to 12 months and the relevant rules also provide for accompanying dependents. Entry under the Tier 5 Creative Worker route is visa-free for non-visa nationals where entry is for no more than three months.\n\nThe deal delivers on the Government’s promise to take the UK out of the EU’s customs territory and to regain control of our borders. This means there will be new customs processes on goods headed from GB into the EU and vice versa. These processes ensure that customs authorities remain able to protect their regulatory, security and financial interests. As part of this, ATA Carnets can be used  for temporary imports of some goods, including professional equipment, as an alternative to facing full customs controls. This is already an option for temporary goods movements from the UK to many other non-EU countries. It reflects the established international approach in line with the ATA and Istanbul Conventions.\n\nThe Government recognises the importance of touring for UK musicians and other creative professionals, and has engaged extensively with the creative industries and arts sector since the announcement of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement to ensure they are aware of the new requirements. Going forward, we will continue our close dialogue with the creative and cultural sectors to ensure that they have the support they need to thrive. \n\nWe are also taking all steps we can to make the new processes as straightforward as possible for UK artists performing across the continent. Through negotiations with the EU we secured Transparency and Procedural Facilitation measures that will help ensure visa processes are as prompt and smooth as possible. The Agreement also contains provisions that promote efficient customs arrangements and we are working to make it easier to apply for and use ATA Carnets. \n\nFurthermore, the Government is taking unprecedented action to help the music sector during the crisis. We’ve provided £1.5 billion of direct support for arts across the UK, the biggest one off investment ever, and a sum that far exceeds what’s been provided in other countries. That builds on billions more coming from furlough, the self-employed income support scheme and other government support. \n\nDepartment for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2021-01-14T16:49:30.909Z","updated_at":"2021-01-14T16:49:30.909Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2021-02-08","transcript_url":"https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/1675/default/","video_url":"https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d05381df-7842-4391-bd45-d567aaaa36b0","debate_pack_url":"","overview":"","public_engagement_url":"https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/22289/default/","debate_summary_url":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"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":324762,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/324762.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 universities to partially refund tuition fees for 20/21 due to Covid-19","background":"The quality of online lectures is not equal to face-to-face lectures. Students should not have to pay full tuition fees for online lectures, without experiencing university life. The Government should require UK universities to partially refund tuition fees while online teaching is implemented.","additional_details":"The UK Government should care because thousands of UK and international students studying in the UK are going to be going into debt for an education that might not be worth the amount of money universities are asking for. Students should get the chance to experience university life in full, with access to societies, opportunities and chances to network. Many benefits of attending University have been taken away by Covid-19, there is so much more to University than the academic side.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":270659,"created_at":"2020-06-04T17:03:23.466Z","updated_at":"2022-02-15T09:57:23.120Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2020-07-29T18:06:28.807Z","closed_at":"2021-01-29T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2020-06-04T17:18:34.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-09T19:35:04.000Z","government_response_at":"2020-09-24T15:55:17.641Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2020-09-10T14:56:34.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2020-10-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2020-11-16","debate_outcome_at":"2020-11-17T09:44:07.353Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2020-09-24","summary":"Higher education providers must deliver high-quality courses. If students are unhappy, they should first complain to their provider, or the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education","details":"Government recognises the challenges facing students and supports them in their desire to continue receiving the best possible learning experience from our higher education (HE) providers. During this unprecedented period, where it is not possible to provide face-to-face learning in a COVID-secure environment, we expect HE providers to offer high-quality online education that allows students to progress and to complete their studies within the time period they had been anticipating.\n\nThere are some fantastic and innovative examples of high-quality online learning being delivered by HE providers across the country.  The sector has put in significant resources and worked hard to provide and prepare learning materials for this academic year. We expect that HE providers will be open for the autumn term, combining online teaching and in-person tuition in ways that they consider appropriate which minimises risk.\n\nUniversities are autonomous and responsible for setting their own fees, up to a maximum of £9,250 for Approved (fee cap) providers. In deciding to keep charging full fees, universities will of course want to ensure that they can continue to deliver courses which are fit for purpose and help students progress their qualifications. Any refund would be a matter for universities, so we are not considering a write-off of tuition fee loans.\n\nWe believe that students should be at the heart of the HE system. The Office for Students (OfS), the regulator in England, has committed to protecting students throughout the present crisis whilst ensuring that quality and standards are upheld. The Government’s expectation is that quality and academic standards must be maintained, and the OfS has made it clear that all HE providers must continue to comply with registration conditions relating to quality and standards, which set out requirements to ensure that courses are high quality, students are supported and achieve good outcomes, and standards are protected. The OfS has published information and guidance for providers and students, and the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) has also published a series of guides to support providers to secure academic standards and to support student achievement during the pandemic.\n\nGovernment has been clear that we expect providers to ensure that continuing and prospective students receive the clear, accurate and timely information needed to make informed decisions. This includes making them aware of any potential for changes at the earliest opportunity.\n\nThe Government has been in close communication with partners in the HE sector and to help providers make informed decisions about their provision and, on 10 September, the Government issued updated guidance to the HE sector on reopening campuses and buildings. The Government will continue to work closely with the QAA to ensure students continue to leave HE with qualifications that have real value, reflect their hard work and allow people to progress.\n\nThe Government’s clear expectation is that HE providers should make all reasonable efforts to enable students to complete their studies. If providers are unable to facilitate adequate online and in-person tuition, they should seek to avoid charging students for any additional terms they may need to undergo as a consequence – avoiding effectively charging them twice. Whether or not an individual student is entitled to a refund of fees will depend on the specific contractual arrangements between the provider and student.\n\nIt is important that students continue to receive a good standard of education, and they are entitled to make a complaint if they feel that their HE provider has not taken sufficient steps to appropriately respond to this situation. In the first instance, students should speak to their provider to see if they can resolve their complaint. We expect student complaints and appeals processes to be operated flexibly, accessibly, and sympathetically by providers to resolve any concerns. If a student at a provider in England or Wales is not satisfied with their provider’s response, they can ask the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) to consider their complaint.\n\nFinally, Government has worked with the OfS to enable providers to draw upon existing funding to increase hardship funds and support disadvantaged students impacted by COVID-19. As a result, providers were able to use OfS Student Premium funding worth around £23m per month for April to July this year and £256 million for academic year 2020/21 starting from August towards student hardship funds, including the purchase of IT equipment and mental health support, as well as to support providers’ access and participation plans.\n\nGovernment is in the process of responding to a report published by the Petitions Committee on 13th July 2020, relating to the impact of COVID-19 on HE students.\n\nGovernment has previously responded to a petition concerning tuition fee refunds for both COVID-19 disruption and strike action. The response can be found here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/302855\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2020-09-24T15:55:17.639Z","updated_at":"2020-09-24T15:57:35.944Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2020-11-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2020-11-16/debates/7BF8890F-3E72-44BC-B260-49E74D0B91C7/TuitionFees","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n7QzDAmzck","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2020-0132/","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":[]}},{"type":"archived-petition","id":648292,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/648292.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":"Seek a ceasefire and to end Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip","background":"We want the Government to seek a ceasefire and also seek to address the root cause of the current conflict by promoting dialogue and advocating for the end of Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.","additional_details":"This war has the potential to spill over into neighbouring lands and that would only worsen the humanitarian situation. Palestinians have suffered from occupation and blockades for many years now. I urge the Government to pursue a just and peaceful resolution to the current conflict. With peace comes stability for all of us.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":268882,"created_at":"2023-10-09T19:12:00.559Z","updated_at":"2024-10-19T05:49:56.384Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2023-10-18T17:06:34.342Z","closed_at":"2024-04-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-09T20:02:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-22T11:41:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2023-11-13T13:24:45.723Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2023-10-27T14:02:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2023-12-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2023-12-11","debate_outcome_at":"2023-12-13T12:11:58.574Z","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2023-11-13","summary":"We are focused on conflict resolution. We have consistently called for humanitarian pauses to allow aid in and hostages out, and welcome the announcement of four-hour pauses as a first step.","details":"As the Prime Minister has said: following Hamas’ horrific terrorist attacks on 7 October, there is no scenario where Hamas can be allowed to control Gaza again. That is why we are not at this stage calling for a general ceasefire, which would potentially allow Hamas to regroup and entrench its position. The United Kingdom is supportive of humanitarian pauses as part of measures to facilitate the flow of life-saving humanitarian aid and ensure civilians are safe.\n\nThe UK’s longstanding position on the Middle East Peace Process is clear: we remain committed to a two-state solution, and support a negotiated settlement leading to a safe and secure Israel living alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state. We do not believe that a long-term presence of Israeli security forces within Gaza would be of benefit to Israelis or Palestinians, and will foster discontent in the region. \n\nIn their diplomatic engagements with governments in the region and beyond, the Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary, and Lord Ahmad, the Minister of State for the Middle East, have all also discussed ways to establish Israeli-Palestinian dialogue and to prevent wider regional escalation. This includes the King of Jordan, the President of Egypt, the Prime Minister of Israel, Palestinian Authority President Abbas, the President of Turkey, the Amir of Qatar, the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, the UN Secretary General and the leaders of France, Canada, Italy, the USA and Germany. The Foreign Secretary visited Israel on 11 October, Egypt on 19 October, attended a summit convened by President Sisi in Egypt on 21 October, visited the United Arab Emirates on 30 October, and has this week met with G7 Foreign Ministers in Japan, and Arab Foreign Ministers in Saudi Arabia. Lord Ahmad visited Egypt on 20-21 October, Israel and the OPTs on 1-2 November, and Morocco on 7-8 November.\n\nForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office","created_at":"2023-11-13T13:24:45.721Z","updated_at":"2023-11-13T13:24:45.721Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2023-12-11","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2023-12-11/debates/7B9C9F44-6D85-4743-9B9E-D305A5E5C14F/IsraelAndPalestine","video_url":"https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/0278ce21-241e-4315-9c17-94cb1b7f1d0b","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2023-0226/","overview":"","public_engagement_url":null,"debate_summary_url":null},"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}}]}