{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=619","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":700143,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700143.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Call a General Election","background":"I would like there to be another General Election. \r\n\r\nI believe the current Labour Government have gone back on the promises they laid out in the lead up to the last election.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":3084713,"created_at":"2024-10-31T09:43:44.666Z","updated_at":"2026-08-04T13:29:09.654Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-20T09:13:21.152Z","closed_at":"2025-05-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-10-31T10:09:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-23T16:51:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-12-06T16:09:44.690Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-23T21:18:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2024-11-27","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-01-06","debate_outcome_at":"2025-01-07T10:52:50.816Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-12-06","summary":"This Government was elected on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election. Our full focus is on fixing the foundations, rebuilding Britain, and restoring public confidence in government.","details":"The Prime Minister can call a general election at a time of their choosing by requesting a dissolution of Parliament from the Sovereign within the five-year life of a Parliament. The Government was elected by the British people on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election.\n\nThis Government is fixing the foundations and delivering change with investment and reform to deliver growth, with more jobs, more money in people’s pockets, to rebuild Britain and get the NHS back on its feet. This will be built on the strong foundations of a stable economy, national security and secure borders as we put politics back in the service of working people.\n\nOn entering office, a £22 billion black hole was identified in the nation’s finances. We inherited unprecedented challenges, with crumbling public services and crippled public finances, but will deliver a decade of national renewal through our five missions: economic growth, fixing the NHS, safer streets, making Britain a clean energy super-power and opportunity for all. This is what was promised and is what we are delivering.\n\nThe Government’s first Budget freed up tens of billions of pounds to invest in Britain’s future while locking in stability, preventing devastating austerity in our public services and protecting working people’s payslips.\n\nMission-led government rejects the sticking-plaster solutions of the past and unites public and private sectors, national, devolved and local government, business and unions, and the whole of civil society in a shared purpose. The Government will continue to deliver the manifesto of change that it was elected on. \n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2024-12-06T16:09:44.688Z","updated_at":"2024-12-06T16:09:44.688Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-01-06","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-01-06/debates/7132F58B-DE05-4912-8BFC-67F310B55911/GeneralElection","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1BAM81Twgk","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2024-0177/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":730194,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730194.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not introduce Digital ID cards","background":"We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.","additional_details":"We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We oppose the creation of any national ID system. \r\n \r\nID cards were scrapped in 2010, in our view for good reason.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2984191,"created_at":"2025-06-12T15:26:34.449Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:25.998Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-09T15:28:15.595Z","closed_at":"2026-01-09T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T16:12:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-03T12:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.956Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-22T12:28:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-09T13:28:36.897Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-02","summary":"We will introduce a digital ID within this Parliament to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies. We will consult on details soon. ","details":"The Government has announced plans to introduce a digital ID system which is fit for the needs of modern Britain. We are committed to making people’s everyday lives easier and more secure, to putting more control in their hands (including over their own data), and to driving growth through harnessing digital technology. We also want to learn from countries which have digitised government services for the benefit of their citizens, in line with our manifesto commitment to modernise government.\n\nCurrently, when UK citizens and residents use public services, start a new job, or, for example, buy alcohol, they often need to present an assortment of physical documents to prove who they are or things about themselves. This is both bureaucratic for the individual and creates space for abuse and fraud. This includes known issues with illegal working and modern slavery, while the fragmented approach and multiple systems across Government make it difficult for people to access vital services. Further, there are too many people who are excluded, like the 1 in 10 UK adults who don’t have a physical photo ID, so can struggle to prove who they are and access the products and services they are entitled to.\n\nTo tackle these interlinked issues, we will introduce a new national digital ID. This is not a card but a new digital identity that will be available for free to all UK citizens and legal residents aged 16 and over (although we will consider through consultation if this should be age 13 and over). Over time, people will be able to use it to seamlessly access a range of public and private sector services, with the aim of making our everyday lives easier and more secure. It will not be compulsory to obtain a digital ID but it will be mandatory for some applications.\n\nFor example, the new digital ID will build on GOV.UK One Login and the GOV.UK Wallet to drive the transformation of public services. Over time, this system will allow people to access government services – such as benefits or tax records – without needing to remember multiple logins or provide physical documents. It will significantly streamline interactions with the state, saving time and reducing frustrating paperwork, while also helping to create opportunities for more joined up government services. International examples show how beneficial this can be. For instance, Estonia’s system reportedly saves each citizen hours every month by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, and the move to becoming a digital society has saved taxpayer money.\n\nBy the end of this Parliament, employers will have to check the new digital ID when conducting a ‘right to work’ check. This will help combat criminal gangs who promise access to the UK labour market in order to profit from dangerous and illegal channel crossings. It will create a fairer system between UK citizens and legal residents, crack down on forged documents, and streamline the process for employers, driving up compliance. Further, it will create business information showing where employers are conducting checks, so driving more targeted action against non-compliant employers.\n\nFor clarity, it will not be a criminal offence to not hold a digital ID and police will not be able to demand to see a digital ID as part of a “stop and search.”\n\nPrivacy and security will also be central to the digital ID programme. We will follow data protection law and best practice in creating a system which people can rightly put their trust in. People in the UK already know and trust digital credentials held in their phone wallets to use in their everyday lives, from paying for things to storing boarding passes. The new system will be built on similar technology and be your boarding pass to government. Digitally checkable digital credentials are more secure than physical documents which can be lost, copied or forged, and often mean sharing more information than just what is necessary for a given transaction.\nThe new system will be designed in accordance with the highest security standards to protect against a comprehensive range of threats, including cyber-attacks.\n\nWe will launch a public consultation in the coming weeks and work closely with employers, trade unions, civil society groups and other stakeholders, to co-design the scheme and ensure it is as secure and inclusive as possible. Following consultation, we will seek to bring forward legislation to underpin this system.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.953Z","updated_at":"2025-10-02T15:29:00.740Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-08/debates/9E01F17C-557A-4D02-8A93-B573721B8B20/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/dCGWpaAfJIw","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10369/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727309,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727309.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Call an immediate general election","background":"We want an immediate general election to be held. We think the majority need and want change.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1059229,"created_at":"2025-05-12T05:53:57.501Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T10:44:14.990Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-05T09:37:54.250Z","closed_at":"2025-12-05T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-13T16:30:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T15:06:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.937Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-06T11:53:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-12","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-14T17:20:59.292Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-11","summary":"This Government was elected on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election. Our full focus is on fixing the foundations, rebuilding Britain, and restoring public confidence in government.","details":"The Prime Minister can call a general election at a time of their choosing by requesting a dissolution of Parliament from the Sovereign within the five-year life of a Parliament. The Government was elected by the British people on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election.\n\nThis Government is fixing the foundations and delivering change with investment and reform to deliver growth, with more jobs, more money in people’s pockets, to rebuild Britain and get the NHS back on its feet. This will be built on the strong foundations of a stable economy, national security and secure borders as we put politics back in the service of working people.\n\nOn entering office, a £22 billion black hole was identified in the nation’s finances. We inherited unprecedented challenges, with crumbling public services and crippled public finances, but will deliver a decade of national renewal through our five missions: economic growth, fixing the NHS, safer streets, making Britain a clean energy super-power and opportunity for all. This is what was promised and is what we are delivering.\n\nThe Government’s first Budget freed up tens of billions of pounds to invest in Britain’s future while locking in stability, preventing devastating austerity in our public services and protecting working people’s payslips.\n\nMission-led government rejects the sticking-plaster solutions of the past and unites public and private sectors, national, devolved and local government, business and unions, and the whole of civil society in a shared purpose. The Government will continue to deliver the manifesto of change that it was elected on.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.935Z","updated_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:38.590Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-12","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-12/debates/49F4AFFB-2D48-44D4-AE24-1DC5262CD9C7/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/9A_Mm9hZO4o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0251/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":737105,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/737105.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce offshore detention/mass deportation for illegal migrants","background":"The Government should seek to establish offshore detention facilities for individuals who enter the UK illegally, to process them and arrange their deportation.\r\n \r\n\r\n","additional_details":"The UK is facing unprecedented levels of illegal migration, particularly through small boat crossings. We believe current use of hotels and temporary accommodation is unsustainable, costly and dangerous.\r\n\r\nWe believe that establishing offshore detention centres would act as a strong deterrent, prevent absconding, and allow for the swift processing and removal of those who enter illegally.\r\n \r\nWe consider the detention and mass deportation of all illegal migrants in the UK is a necessity.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":720772,"created_at":"2025-08-11T15:09:44.204Z","updated_at":"2026-07-14T09:39:27.472Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-12T15:58:14.530Z","closed_at":"2026-03-12T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-11T15:38:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-15T09:19:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-21T09:39:01.426Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-15T14:50:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-05-21","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-07-13","debate_outcome_at":"2026-07-14T09:39:27.472Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-21","summary":"This Government is doing whatever it takes to secure our borders; though offshore detention is costly and impractical, the most sweeping asylum reforms in a generation are being introduced. ","details":"We will do whatever it takes to secure our borders. We believe the number of small boat crossings are shameful and the British people deserve better. To restore order and control to our borders, on 17 November 2025, the Home Secretary announced the most sweeping reforms to tackle illegal migration in decades, removing incentives that bring illegal migrants to the UK and scaling up and easing the return of those with no right to be here. More information on these major changes can be found here - \n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-and-returns-policy-statement. \n\nThese reforms will end the UK’s asylum ‘golden ticket’ which has drawn migrants from safe countries across Europe. We are taking a new approach to refugee protection in the UK, which marks a significant change in direction away from an assumption of offering permanent protection, and towards a more basic, and temporary protection, which we call ‘core protection’ lasting only until a refugee can safely return home. Refugee status will become temporary, reviewed every 30 months, with a 20-year path to settlement, ensuring long-term commitment and integration. \n\nTo reduce other pull factors, we have increased illegal working arrests and raids to the highest level in British history, so that there is nowhere to hide. The number of raids has soared by 77% in the UK since the Government came to power, with 17,400 raids made to dodgy businesses - such as nail bars or barbers – leading to an 83% rise in arrests (July 2024 to end of 2025). This major uplift and over 12,300 arrests were made possible by a £5 million funding boost last year for Immigration Enforcement, to pursue this criminality. The crackdown builds on other work to reduce the lure of illegal working that gangs use to sell spaces on small boats.\n\nOn small boats, our partnership with France led to 20,000 fewer crossings in 2025, and this Government’s landmark UK-France returns agreement means those arriving risk immediate detention and removal. Since this pilot was introduced over 150 people have been removed in this way. To further reduce arrivals, we are giving police new stronger powers to act earlier to disrupt and take down the operations of criminal smuggling gangs.\n\nMore broadly, 50,000 illegal migrants have been removed or deported from British soil since July 2024 - a 23% increase compared to the previous 16-month period before July 2024. We shall go further by returning people to countries that are now safe – eg Syria – and by returning families with no right to be here. As part of this, we are reforming human rights laws so that in deportation cases involving ECHR Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), the British public interest is given an appropriate weight. We are working closely with international partners to reform interpretation of Article 3 (inhuman or degrading treatment) so it is limited to the most serious forms of ill-treatment in the first place. \n\nTo ease removals, this Government will stop at nothing to secure cooperation from all countries to ensure swift and efficient return of those with no right to be in the UK. Where countries fail to cooperate, action will follow, including, where necessary, the use of visa penalties. The UK has already threatened such action on Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and Namibia, due to historical poor cooperation. This has already resulted in improvements to cooperation from Namibia and Angola, while the UK has imposed a first set of visa measures on DRC targeting VIPs and diplomatic passport holders. The UK keeps such cooperation under constant review, and will not hesitate to take further such action, where required.\n\nThis Government is furious at the number of asylum hotels in this country. We will close every one by the end of this Parliament. Progress is already being made: from over 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023, costing almost £9 million a day, there are now fewer than 200 in use. We are working to move asylum seekers to more suitable sites such as disused military bases, to ease pressure on our communities. \n\nThis Government is restoring order and control to our borders.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-01-21T09:39:01.423Z","updated_at":"2026-01-21T09:39:01.423Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-07-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-07-13/debates/EE7AC3BB-248E-4EFB-AE42-5765DECC8B95/IllegalImmigrantsOffshoreDetentionAndDeportation","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aRFK9KLVHc","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10942/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722903,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Repeal the Online Safety Act","background":"We want the Government to repeal the Online Safety act. ","additional_details":"We believe that the scope of the Online Safety act is far broader and restrictive than is necessary in a free society.\r\nFor instance, the definitions in Part 2 covers online hobby forums, which we think do not have the resource to comply with the act and so are shutting down instead.\r\nWe think that Parliament should repeal the act and work towards producing proportionate legislation rather than risking clamping down on civil society talking about trains, football, video games or even hamsters because it can't deal with individual bad faith actors.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":550136,"created_at":"2025-03-20T19:05:13.386Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.046Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-22T14:53:36.080Z","closed_at":"2025-10-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-21T00:04:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-15T10:34:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.825Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-25T19:21:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-15","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-04T10:18:45.939Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-28","summary":"The Government is working with Ofcom to ensure that online in-scope services are subject to robust but proportionate regulation through the effective implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023. ","details":"I would like to thank all those who signed the petition. It is right that the regulatory regime for in scope online services takes a proportionate approach, balancing the protection of users from online harm with the ability for low-risk services to operate effectively and provide benefits to users.\n\nThe Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.\n\nProportionality is a core principle of the Act and is in-built into its duties. As regulator for the online safety regime, Ofcom must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements. Duties in the Communications Act 2003 require Ofcom to act with proportionality and target action only where it is needed.\n\nSome duties apply to all user-to-user and search services in scope of the Act. This includes risk assessments, including determining if children are likely to access the service and, if so, assessing the risks of harm to children. While many services carry low risks of harm, the risk assessment duties are key to ensuring that risky services of all sizes do not slip through the net of regulation. For example, the Government is very concerned about small platforms that host harmful content, such as forums dedicated to encouraging suicide or self-harm. Exempting small services from the Act would mean that services like these forums would not be subject to the Act’s enforcement powers. Even forums that might seem harmless carry potential risks, such as where adults come into contact with child users.\n\nOnce providers have carried out their duties to conduct risk assessments, they must protect the users of their service from the identified risks of harm. Ofcom’s illegal content Codes of Practice set out recommended measures to help providers comply with these obligations, measures that are tailored in relation to both size and risk. If a provider’s risk assessment accurately determines that the risks faced by users are low across all harms, Ofcom’s Codes specify that they only need some basic measures, including:\n\n• easy-to-find, understandable terms and conditions;\n• a complaints tool that allows users to report illegal material when they see it, backed up by a process to deal with those complaints;\n• the ability to review content and take it down if it is illegal (or breaches their terms of service);\n• a specific individual responsible for compliance, who Ofcom can contact if needed.\n\nWhere a children's access assessment indicates a platform is likely to be accessed by children, a subsequent risk assessment must be conducted to identify measures for mitigating risks. Like the Codes of Practice on illegal content, Ofcom’s recently issued child safety Codes also tailor recommendations based on risk level. For example, highly effective age assurance is recommended for services likely accessed by children that do not already prohibit and remove harmful content such as pornography and suicide promotion.  Providers of services likely to be accessed by UK children were required to complete their assessment, which Ofcom may request, by 24 July.\n\nOn 8 July, Ofcom’s CEO wrote to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology noting Ofcom’s responsibility for regulating a wide range of highly diverse services, including those run by businesses, but also charities, community and voluntary groups, individuals, and many services that have not been regulated before.\n\nThe letter notes that the Act’s aim is not to penalise small, low-risk services trying to comply in good faith. Ofcom – and the Government – recognise that many small services are dynamic small businesses supporting innovation and offer significant value to their communities. Ofcom will take a sensible approach to enforcement with smaller services that present low risk to UK users, only taking action where it is proportionate and appropriate, and will focus on cases where the risk and impact of harm is highest.\n\nOfcom has developed an extensive programme of work designed to support a smoother journey to compliance, particularly for smaller firms. This has been underpinned by interviews, workshops and research with a diverse range of online services to ensure the tools meet the needs of different types of services. Ofcom’s letter notes its ‘guide for services’ guidance and tools hub, and its participation in events run by other organisations and networks including those for people running small services, as well as its commitment to review and improve materials and tools to help support services to create a safer life online.\n\nThe Government will continue to work with Ofcom towards the full implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, including monitoring proportionate implementation.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z","updated_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-12-15/debates/DA0F7CFE-CCED-4864-BCCF-160E0AF56F92/OnlineSafetyAct2023Repeal","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ixue9rQbi0","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0224/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":705383,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/705383.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop financial and other support for asylum seekers","background":"This petition is to advocate a cessation of financial and other support provided to asylum seekers by the Government. This support currently includes shelter, food, medical care (including optical and dental), and cash support.","additional_details":"I believe that such provisions may inadvertently incentivise illegal migration, particularly via the English Channel. \r\n \r\nThis petition is to urge the Government to discontinue these support measures and payments.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":427447,"created_at":"2024-11-27T11:30:36.204Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.104Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-20T16:07:53.467Z","closed_at":"2025-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-27T15:19:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-01T13:51:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.851Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-03T19:54:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-20","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T11:33:09.681Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-23","summary":"We are determined to tackle illegal migration and end the use of asylum hotels but in the meantime there is a legal requirement to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be living on the streets.","details":"We are grateful to everyone who took the time to sign this petition. In response, we will first explain the background to the current situation, and then set out what the Government is doing about it.\n\nBackground:\n\nSince the 1950s, the UK has been legally obliged under the Refugee Convention to properly consider the claims of asylum-seekers arriving in our country. There is also a long-standing legal requirement to provide support to those asylum-seekers who would otherwise be left destitute on our streets.\n\nApplicants for support must provide details of their income and assets, so an assessment can be made of their risk of destitution. If they provide misleading information, break the rules of their accommodation, or do anything else to breach the conditions of their support, it can be suspended or withdrawn. \n\nWhen this Government came to office last July, it inherited an asylum system under unprecedented strain, with tens of thousands of cases waiting to be considered, and asylum hotels being used across the country to house the asylum-seekers caught in that backlog. At their peak in autumn 2023, they had 400 hotels in use, at a cost of almost £9 million per day.\n\nOur Plan for Change:\n\nAs part of the Government’s Plan for Change, we are restoring order to the asylum system by clearing the backlog, ending the use of hotels, and increasing the removal of individuals with no right to be in the UK.\n\nFirst, on clearing the asylum backlog, we have significantly increased the numbers of cases being processed each month. In the last full quarter, from January to March 2025, the second highest number of initial decisions was taken since records began in 2002, more than double the number taken in the three months before the election.\n\nSecond, on the use of asylum hotels, we will reach the point this summer where the number of hotels in use will have halved from its peak under the last government, and our commitment remains to end their use entirely by the end of this Parliament. As a result of the action we have taken already, £500 million has been cut from the annual cost of asylum hotels. \n\nThird, on removing people with no right to be here, our new enforcement programme put almost 30,000 people on flights out of the UK up to 18th May, including the four biggest returns charter flights in our country’s history. That includes 8,511 former asylum cases, an increase of almost a quarter compared to the same period twelve months earlier. \n\nWe will continue to take action in all three areas above, so that the cost of providing support to asylum-seekers is reduced by as much as possible as quickly as possible. However, we cannot end this problem entirely overnight. There are still tens of thousands of people in the backlog, and even though we are working as fast as we can to process their cases, there is still a legal requirement to provide many of them with support in the interim. \n\nThe petition’s proposals:\n\nThe petition proposes ending that support immediately, and while we understand the objective behind that proposal, we have to recognise that – in many cases – the people currently receiving that support would end up living on the street instead, including many women and children. According to the latest official data, the number of rough sleepers in England in autumn 2024 \nwas 4,667, so if we immediately ended the support given to every asylum-seeker, it would increase that number by multiple amounts.\n\nWe believe a better approach is to continue speeding up the processing of asylum claims, so that people who are genuine refugees can be accepted, those who are not can be rejected and removed, and either way, we can keep working to cut the amount of money spent on asylum support. In addition, we will continue taking strong action to reduce the number of people entering the UK asylum system in the first place:\n\n• Through the work of our Border Security Command and the new counter-terror style powers in our Border Security Bill, we are doing what should have been done many years ago, and going after the organised criminal gangs who make millions bringing people across the Channel in small boats. We have also agreed with the French authorities that – for the first time – they will start intercepting those boats in the shallow waters off the French coast, and taking the passengers back to shore, something which their internal rules have previously prevented them doing; and\n\n• In our Immigration White Paper, we have not only set out plans to reduce net migration substantially from the record levels reached under the last government, we have also announced new proposals to crack down on abuse of the asylum system, in particular to prevent people coming here on student and work visas, and then claiming asylum at the end of their stay. For too long, the previous government turned a blind eye to those abuses and let the system run out of control, but this Government is determined to restore order to the system, and save the taxpayer money. \n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.848Z","updated_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.848Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqocyL8XpV8","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0184/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":702844,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702844.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Raise the income tax personal allowance from £12,570 to £20,000 ","background":"Raise the income tax personal allowance from £12570 to £20000. We think this would help low earners to get off benefits and allow pensioners a decent income.","additional_details":"We think it is abhorrent to tax pensioners on their state pension when it is over the personal allowance. We also think raising the personal allowance would lift many low earners out of benefits and inject more cash into the economy creating growth.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":281794,"created_at":"2024-11-24T12:27:44.090Z","updated_at":"2025-12-23T15:37:17.809Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-20T12:09:49.385Z","closed_at":"2025-06-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-24T20:32:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-05T15:20:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-20T15:47:44.075Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-10T22:48:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-03-21","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-05-12","debate_outcome_at":"2025-05-16T13:29:04.152Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-20","summary":"The Government is committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible while ensuring fiscal responsibility.","details":"The Government is committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible while ensuring fiscal responsibility and so, at our first Budget, we decided not to extend the freeze on personal tax thresholds.\n\nThe Government has no plans to increase the Personal Allowance to £20,000. Increasing the Personal Allowance to £20,000 would come at a significant fiscal cost of many billions of pounds per annum. This would reduce tax receipts substantially, decreasing funds available for the UK’s hospitals, schools, and other essential public services that we all rely on. It would also undermine the work the Chancellor has done to restore fiscal responsibility and economic stability, which are critical to getting our economy growing and keeping taxes, inflation, and mortgages as low as possible.\n\nThe Government keeps all taxes under review as part of the policy making process. The Chancellor will announce any changes to the tax system at fiscal events in the usual way.   \n\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2025-02-20T15:47:44.067Z","updated_at":"2025-02-20T15:47:44.067Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-05-12","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-05-12/debates/EEB4E70E-87F1-450E-8CA7-1C38E316913F/IncomeTaxPersonalAllowance","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEI8WbYRHCw","debate_pack_url":"https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-10237/CBP-10237.pdf","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":730605,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730605.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Mandatory collection and publication of certain child sexual offender data","background":"Place a statutory requirement on councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and all other related institutions to collect, record and publish the nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion of child sexual offenders, including gang based crime.","additional_details":"To protect children and inform public policy, we believe it is essential to collect, record and publish the nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion of all child sexual offenders, including gang based crime. This data will allow for better understanding of offender demographics, ensure transparency, and support targeted safeguarding strategies. Without this information, critical patterns may be missed, weakening efforts to prevent abuse and protect vulnerable children.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":260974,"created_at":"2025-06-17T07:57:36.152Z","updated_at":"2026-06-08T16:03:12.622Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-16T13:00:46.177Z","closed_at":"2026-01-16T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T08:09:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T15:07:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-30T14:40:37.703Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T21:58:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-05-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-06-01","debate_outcome_at":"2026-06-02T12:26:55.453Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-05","summary":"The Government is already taking action to increase the collection and transparency of data on the demographic characteristics of individuals responsible for group-based child sexual exploitation.","details":"The Government is determined to protect children from the horrors of grooming gangs and other forms of sexual abuse and exploitation. In February 2025, the Prime Minister and then Home Secretary commissioned Baroness Louise Casey of Blackstock to evaluate the understanding of the scale, nature and drivers of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA), including assessing data on the ethnicity of perpetrators. Her National Audit was published on Monday 16 June, and can be found here – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-audit-on-group-based-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse.  \n\nThe Government immediately accepted the twelve recommendations from Baroness Casey’s Audit, which included making it a requirement for the police to collect the ethnicity and nationality data of individuals suspected of being members of grooming gangs or perpetrators of other group-based child sexual exploitation (recommendation four).  \n\nIn July this year, the former Home Secretary wrote to all Chief Constables to set out the clear expectation that ethnicity data on child sexual exploitation and grooming gang suspects should be collected in every case, and to urge them to make sure they are fulfilling their obligation to collect suspect ethnicity data as part of the Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. The Home Office is closely monitoring data collection and provision from forces and continues to engage with individual forces on where improvements are required. If we do not see improvements, we will not hesitate to take further action.  \n\nIn respect of nationality data, the Ministry of Justice already includes data on the nationality of persons within the prison system in its quarterly offender management statistics, here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.  In addition, the Home Office has committed to review the data that it collects and publishes regarding the nationalities and offences committed by foreign national offenders who are subject to deportation proceedings. Further details of that review process can be found here:  \nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/statistics-on-foreign-national-offenders-and-the-immigration-system. \n\nRecommendation four of Baroness Casey’s Audit did not include the collection of data on religion and immigration status. There is no current mechanism to collect such data on religion, other than through any declaration made by the perpetrator themselves, which would weaken both the accuracy and comprehensiveness of any analysis based on that data. \n\nMore broadly, as part of implementing the Casey Audit recommendations, we will nonetheless be looking at how safeguarding agencies (including the police, local authorities, schools and health services) are using information and intelligence to disrupt and prosecute those committing these terrible crimes and ensure victims and survivors are protected. \n\nWe will also continually seek to deepen our understanding of the drivers behind child grooming gangs and other group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse and ensure that as many as possible of the perpetrators responsible for these heinous crimes – whether non-recent or contemporary – are investigated and brought to justice. \n\nHome Office\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730605)","created_at":"2025-07-30T14:40:37.701Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T17:38:50.218Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-06-01","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-06-01/debates/15CB352A-7E26-4649-B6E8-CACCCFAFF64D/ChildSexualOffenderData","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaL6n2erq88","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10851/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":705384,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/705384.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban immediately the use of dogs in scientific and regulatory procedures","background":"As a first step to end animal testing, we want an immediate ban for dogs. They are commercially bred in what we see as bleak and inhumane factory-like conditions. We believe there is evidence suggesting that dogs are left being unattended for extended periods in a Government-licenced establishment. ","additional_details":"In 2023, 2,456 dogs were used in 3,749 scientific procedures, 734 were classified as causing severe or moderate harm. There were 2,593 procedures for regulatory purposes even though there is no UK legislation that mandates animal testing. These procedures can include oral gavage, when a tube is inserted into the dog's throat, up to 3 times a day, to administer liquids to the stomach. There are studies questioning the reliability and human-relevant value of the outcomes of these tests.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":257938,"created_at":"2024-11-27T11:31:12.874Z","updated_at":"2025-11-03T10:55:30.589Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-02-14T10:09:31.203Z","closed_at":"2025-08-14T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-27T12:08:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-16T20:59:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.930Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-18T12:22:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-03-21","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-04-28","debate_outcome_at":"2025-04-29T09:03:35.117Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-03-05","summary":"The government does not agree to the proposed immediate ban as international guidance still requires data from animal testing to ensure the safety of medicines and products before testing in humans.","details":"While the use of animals in science, including for human medicines, generates significant debate, the carefully regulated use of animals in scientific research remains necessary to protect humans, animal health and the wider environment. The Government therefore does not agree to immediately ban the use of dogs for testing and research purposes in the UK.\n\nThe manifesto committed the Government to partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing. This is a long-term goal, and it will need further scientific and technical advancement and validation to reach this point but we are determined to work towards it. Currently the use of animals remains important for understanding how biological systems work, in the development of safe new medicines, treatments and technologies, and in testing chemicals.\n\nOur current approach is to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs), and to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards. The UK has a world leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research.\n\nThe use of animals in science is highly regulated, including a three-tier system of licensing which licenses each establishment, project and individual involved in performing regulated procedures involving animals. All establishments are required to have dedicated individuals, including veterinary surgeons with legal responsibilities for the care and welfare of animals, and an ethical review body, which reviews any proposals for the use of animals and promotes the 3Rs of animal use.\n\nThe UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\n\nAlthough much research can be done without using animals, there are still purposes where use of live animals is essential, as the complexity of whole biological systems cannot be reliably replicated using validated alternative methodologies. Animal testing is therefore required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). We are working with regulators to see how advances in technology can and will reduce use and phase out use in some areas.\n\nIt should be noted that the MHRA does not require all medicines to be tested on two species as some drugs lack their primary mode of action in animal species other than primates. However, most drugs do retain their activity in animal species and safety testing in a second species is therefore required for these drugs, with dogs being one of the species that can be used. Toxicity testing in dogs is limited in duration: in the UK and European Union, this period is 6 months. The MHRA does not itself use dogs in scientific procedures. The Government’s commitment to phasing out the use of animals is a clear goal; however, we expect the use of animals in science to adapt and reduce over time and be phased out for some purposes.\n\nThe Government will take steps to place the UK at the forefront of an alternative methods revolution and we believe that scientific advances make the prospects for change better than they have ever been. We are supporting and accelerating advances in biomedical science and technologies to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research and importantly to avoid some of the scientific limitations of animal models of human diseases. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling and AI techniques based on very large data sets. DSIT, Home Office and DEFRA Ministers have agreed to publish an alternative methods strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods and the phasing out of animal testing. We expect to publish this strategy later this year.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.921Z","updated_at":"2025-03-05T13:30:55.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-04-28","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-04-28/debates/3CC1C22D-4585-4A07-90EF-0FB55C37FC54/ScientificAndRegulatoryProceduresUseOfDogs","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/oQ3Vpixa_vU?si=F5j5fGjEPmx5NNtw&t=296","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0082/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":718406,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718406.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Shut the migrant hotels down now and deport illegal migrants housed there","background":"The Labour Party pledged to end asylum hotels if it won power. Labour is now in power.\r\n","additional_details":"It has transpired that the migrant hotels may stay open for at least the next 4 years.\r\n \r\nWe want to see the migrant hotels shut down now and all illegal migrants housed in them deported immediately.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":257442,"created_at":"2025-02-19T01:07:42.455Z","updated_at":"2025-11-28T18:20:45.609Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-01T10:02:49.961Z","closed_at":"2025-10-01T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-19T05:06:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-07T09:36:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.598Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-28T21:28:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-20","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T11:34:04.351Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-04-23","summary":"We are working as fast as possible to close asylum hotels and increase the removal of people with no right to be in the UK, but we inherited an asylum system in chaos, and we cannot fix it overnight. ","details":"The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be left destitute on our streets.\n\nBefore an individual can apply for that support, they are required to provide information about their personal circumstances which includes declaring all income, assets, and other forms of support available to them. Entitlement to support is kept under review, and failed asylum seekers are expected to leave the UK. \n\nBecause of the historically high number of individuals claiming asylum in the UK in recent years, there have been shortages in available asylum accommodation, and that required the previous government to start taking over hotels for that purpose.\n\nAt their peak, in Autumn 2023, more than 400 hotels were in use as asylum accommodation, at a cost of almost £9 million per day. That situation was also exacerbated towards the end of the last government when asylum decision-making fell into steep decline, and the asylum backlog rose accordingly.\n\nAs a result, the new Government inherited an asylum system under unprecedented strain, and due to the size of the backlog that has to be cleared, we have been forced to continue with the use of hotels for the time being, although it should be noted that the number in use now is lower than it was before the election and is around half the peak level that was reached in 2023.\n\nHowever, this Government is absolutely clear that hotel use is not a permanent solution, and we remain determined to end hotel usage entirely, as part of our objective to cut the costs of asylum accommodation.\n\nA key element of this is clearing the asylum backlog. Compared to the last few months of the previous government, when asylum decision making collapsed by more than 70%, we have spent the last nine months doing the opposite, increasing asylum decision making by 52% in the last three months of 2024 alone.\n\nAnother key element of ending hotel use is increasing the removal of people who have no right to be in the UK, including failed asylum seekers. After coming to power, this Government reallocated significant additional resource into immigration enforcement and returns, and again, that has delivered significant results.\n\nIn our first nine months in office, this Government has ensured the removal of more than 24,000 failed asylum seekers, foreign criminals and other immigration offenders with no right to be in the UK, an 11 per cent increase on the same period a year earlier, and a higher nine-month total than any achieved under the previous government after 2017. Of these returns, 6,781 were asylum-related returns, an increase of almost a quarter compared to the same period twelve months prior.\n\nWe will continue working hard to clear the asylum backlog, and remove people with no right to be in the UK, and over time, that will help us to achieve our commitment to end the use of hotels. We cannot achieve that overnight, because the scale of the challenge we inherited was too large, but we are determined to deliver on our pledge, and ensure that these unacceptably high costs are brought to an end.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.595Z","updated_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.595Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqocyL8XpV8","debate_pack_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746363,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746363.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep 5-Year ILR and Restrict Access to Benefits for New ILR Holders","background":"The Government should keep the current 5-year route to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and restrict access to government benefits for new ILR holders.","additional_details":"Extending the ILR route to 10 years would unfairly affect thousands of Skilled Worker visa holders who moved to the UK based on existing 5-year rules, disrupting their plans, families, and financial stability. The Government should keep the 5-year ILR route and ensuring new ILR holders demonstrate financial independence before accessing public benefits. We think this protect fairness and stability. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":244450,"created_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:06.069Z","updated_at":"2026-05-18T23:00:00.355Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-18T12:20:30.212Z","closed_at":"2026-05-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T15:40:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-22T12:36:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.923Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T15:53:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:49:54.168Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"As set out in the Immigration White Paper, the default qualifying period doubles to 10 years. We welcome views on other measures, including access to benefits, via the earned settlement consultation.","details":"Settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. It is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. It marks an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nUnder the current system, individuals qualify for settlement primarily on the basis of the length of time they have spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\n\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in the UK. Moreover, they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\n\nWe therefore intend to fundamentally reform our settlement rules for the first time in over 50 years. The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, set out that the default qualifying period for settlement would be increased from five to ten years. It also included proposals for a new ‘earned settlement’ model which are subject to consultation.\n\nThe consultation on the ‘earned settlement’ model launched on 20 November 2025 and will run for 12 weeks until 12 February 2026. It is open to anyone who wishes to share their views, including individuals, organisations and other stakeholders who may be affected by, or have an interest in, the proposed changes.\n\nWe are proposing to increase the baseline qualifying period for settlement to 15 years for those on the Skilled Worker route in a role below RQF level 6 (equivalent to a bachelor’s degree). \n\nIn the next five years, settlement volumes are forecast to increase significantly, due to the unprecedented level of migration to the UK in recent years. Between 2021 and 2024, there was significant growth in lower-skilled migration on work routes, particularly on the Health and Social Care visa, which is estimated to make up 47% of settlement grants in 2028.\n\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\n\nSpeaking English at degree level, earning a high salary and being employed in specific public service roles would result in a reduction. However, where a person has claimed public funds or committed immigration offences, they would face a penalty of extra years. \n\nWe are also proposing that benefits and social housing might not be available to new migrants granted settled status and that instead they should be reserved for those who have achieved British citizenship, easing the pressure on public finances.\n\nFor those who are on a pathway to settlement but have not yet been granted settled status, we are consulting on transitional arrangements for these individuals. \n\nWe would encourage anyone with an interest in the proposals, including the petitioners who have taken the time to sign this petition, to contribute to the consultation. We realise the significance of these proposals to people and we will listen carefully to what they tell us.\n\nFurther details on the proposals and the link to respond to the consultation can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/earned-settlement\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":759783,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/759783.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make a public animal abuser register & automatically ban ownership","background":"Create a public register of all offenders convicted of animal abuse and introduce an automatic, lifetime ban on animal ownership for anyone convicted of animal neglect or abuse. This register should be searchable by vets, breeders, charities and the public to prevent repeat offending.","additional_details":"I clean homes for free for people in need and regularly witness animals suffering under owners with a history for animal neglect or abuse. Currently, bans are discretionary and there is no public register. Abusers can continue acquiring animals. A mandatory ban and register could prevent repeat cruelty and break cycles of harm. Additionally, an immediate automatic lifetime ban could prevent animal ownership being at a judge’s discretion.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":243696,"closing_date":"2026-09-12","created_at":"2026-02-03T12:04:15.845Z","updated_at":"2026-08-18T17:22:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-12T17:01:57.173Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-03T12:51:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-02T17:17:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-19T14:22:00.374Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-03T22:06:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-06-09","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-06-29","debate_outcome_at":"2026-06-30T16:05:28.105Z","creator_name":"Bea Elton","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-19","summary":"The government has no plans to introduce an animal abuse register, or an automatic lifetime ban for animal abusers because we already have similar provisions in place.","details":"The government does not think it would be appropriate to introduce a publicly accessible animal cruelty register. The majority of the population comply with our high animal welfare laws. In the upsetting and unacceptable instances where these laws are violated or repeatedly violated, we already have these offences recorded.  \n\nAll prosecutions for animal cruelty offences under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 are currently stored on the Police National Computer. This information may be shared with appropriate organisations. In cases of concern, the information may be shared with the public when requested, at the Police’s discretion. \n\nIt is important that access to this information is restricted, to protect the information from misuse while ensuring it is available for organisations with a justified need to access the information. This is consistent with the government’s approach to the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme and Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme.\n\nThe government does not think it is appropriate to introduce an automatic lifetime ban for animal abusers. Post conviction sentencing powers under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 already include disqualification orders, which can include a lifetime ban, which prevent individuals convicted of animal cruelty from owning, keeping, or participating in the care of animals. Where police or local authorities have concerns that a person subject to a disqualification order may be breaching it, they are able to carry out checks and take appropriate enforcement action.\n\nWhile we note the frustration that disqualification orders are discretionary, it is important that justice is reviewed on a case-by-case basis to remain fair. This is the responsibility of our independent courts and judiciary. The Sentencing Council provides guidelines to support these decisions.\n\nThe government does recognise that there is a disparity in the law between penalties for cruelty to wildlife and similar incidents that involve pet or companion animals and livestock abuse offences. To address this, in the government’s Animal Welfare Strategy, published in December 2025, we committed to review and look to strengthen penalties for cruelty against wildlife so that they are consistent with the higher levels of sentencing available for animal welfare offences against pets and livestock.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-05-19T14:22:00.371Z","updated_at":"2026-05-19T14:22:52.450Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-06-29","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-06-29/debates/5EFB5392-372C-41C5-AA65-E6EE5FD09A08/AnimalAbusers","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/VNOGB13OKDk","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10902/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"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":"petition","id":700824,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700824.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Close the borders! Suspend ALL immigration for 5 years!","background":"We believe our country is facing serious challenges both from legal and illegal migration, and think the only way to deal with this is to suspend all immigration temporarily for 5 years.","additional_details":"We think we need a tougher approach. We believe we can’t even look after the people we have here at the moment.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":229772,"created_at":"2024-11-05T09:44:05.655Z","updated_at":"2026-05-08T10:22:47.279Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-26T10:57:32.064Z","closed_at":"2025-05-26T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-05T21:14:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-26T08:50:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-01-17T11:12:48.123Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-28T13:15:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-02-14","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-03-10","debate_outcome_at":"2025-03-11T10:35:49.415Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-01-17","summary":"The Government is taking the tough action required to reduce both illegal immigration and overall net migration, without the economic damage that would come from suspending immigration entirely.","details":"In his Downing Street speech on 28 November last year, the Prime Minister made clear that net migration - which rose to a record high of more than 900,000 in the year ending June 2023 – must come down. It had been allowed to grow out of control in recent years, driven largely by overseas recruitment. The Prime Minister and Home Secretary have also repeatedly made clear their intention to reduce illegal immigration by dismantling the criminal smuggling gangs behind the trafficking of migrants across the Channel, by cracking down on illegal working within the UK, and by increasing the removal and returns of people with no right to be in this country.\n\nOn net migration, we are committed to bring down numbers through the continuation of tough measures on visas alongside the introduction of new employment legislation, ensuring that the visa and employment systems are strongly aligned. We will do this by making sure that workers in this country receive the skills training they need to fill vacancies in key sectors, so that overseas recruitment does not remain the default for filling those shortages. The independent Migration Advisory Committee has been commissioned to review key sectors, and the long-term plan we will set out in our Immigration White Paper will see departments working across government, partnering with experts to build our skills base and reducing reliance on overseas labour. \n\nAlongside this action to tackle the root causes behind the UK’s historically high levels of net migration, we will continue to:\n\n• Restrict most overseas students from bringing family members to the UK;\n• Restrict the ability of care workers to bring dependants with them and require all care providers sponsoring migrants to register with the Care Quality Commission;\n• Increase the general salary threshold for those arriving on Skilled Worker visas from £26,200 to £38,700; and\n• Abolish the 20% going rate discount so that employers can no longer pay migrants less than UK workers in shortage occupations.\n\nWe have also set out our plans to tackle the criminal smuggling gangs making millions out of small boat crossings, undermining our border security and putting lives at risk. We have introduced the Border Security Command (BSC) to focus on targeting and dismantling this vile trade. The BSC has been backed by £150 million of investment this year and next for investment in new investigators and new technology, and - in partnership with key organisations like the National Crime Agency - it has already overseen significant enforcement action against criminal gangs, in partnership with overseas agencies. The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill will be introduced this year to further strengthen the BSC’s ability to coordinate the UK’s response to all aspects of organised immigration crime, and provide the UK's investigators with stronger powers to go after the smuggling gangs. \n\nThe Prime Minister and Home Secretary have also led the drive for stronger international cooperation in the fight against Organised Immigration Crime, ranging from agreements with the German authorities to target warehouses in Germany storing dinghies destined for use in the Channel, to joint cooperation agreements with the Iraqi and Kurdish authorities to disrupt smuggling gangs and supply chains operating through that region. We have already begun delivering a major surge in immigration enforcement and returns activity to remove people with no right to be in the UK and ensure the rules are both respected and enforced, with 16,400 people returned from 5 July 2024 to 4 January 2025. In the year ending September 2024, asylum-related returns were around a fifth lower than they were compared to 2010. By the end of 2025, it is our ambition to return to 2010 levels of asylum-related returns. We are also continuing to crack down on visa abuse by unscrupulous employers, and the hiring of illegal workers, with major increases in raids and arrests targeted at illegal working. \n\nWe are determined to increase momentum in all the areas set out above to deliver our twin goals to reduce both net migration and illegal immigration. However, we believe it would be harmful to the UK economy to go further, in the way suggested by the petitioners, through suspending all legal migration into the UK. We continue to welcome business investment and talent from around the world, and we value the contribution that controlled migration plays in supporting many sectors of our economy, including our essential public services. By taking the action set out above, and restoring confidence in our immigration controls, we believe we can address many of the concerns which have led to this petition, without damaging our economy and public services by suspending immigration entirely.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-01-17T11:12:48.121Z","updated_at":"2025-01-17T11:14:23.884Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-03-10","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-03-10/debates/9B6A956A-1429-4A08-8033-9651A18E86A1/LegalAndIllegalMigrationSuspension?highlight=immigration#contribution-753B8A74-DCD4-46AA-984B-1FFDE914510B","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/h4FaK4SK2Ss?si=oCZUnzrnFTFJikMe&t=251","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0046/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":750050,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750050.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Dissolve Parliament and call a General Election now!","background":"On July 4 2024, Sir Keir Starmer was elected as Prime Minister. Since then, his Government has introduced measures that were not included in the Labour Party's manifesto.","additional_details":"We believe we were misled and the obfuscation has only got worse since Starmer took power. It is time for action. We believe the Government has failed to defend our borders from the small boats. We have no confidence in the way this Government has acted. Pensioners and farmers have been directly affected by policies that were not included in Labour's manifesto.\r\n \r\nOur country cannot go on like this. Dissolve Parliament and call a General Election now!","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":221477,"created_at":"2025-11-08T22:55:44.097Z","updated_at":"2026-06-11T16:02:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-10T16:12:30.998Z","closed_at":"2026-06-10T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-08T23:27:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-29T07:03:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-21T15:19:31.700Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-03T22:20:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-16T14:38:48.150Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-21","summary":"The Government holds office by virtue of being able to command the confidence of the House of Commons, whose members are elected by the public. There are no plans to change these arrangements.","details":"The Prime Minister can call a general election at a time of their choosing by requesting a dissolution of Parliament from the Sovereign within the five-year life of a Parliament. The Government was elected by the British people on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election.\n\nThis Government remains focused on delivering the change the country voted for at the last General Election. Since coming into office, we have restored stability across government; and secured £340 billion of investment into our country.\n\nWages under this Government have increased more during our first year in office than under the previous 10 years of the last government. We have reduced NHS waiting lists by 225,000 and rolled out thousands of free breakfast clubs across the country. We have also increased the National Minimum Wage and our manifesto pledge to introduce an Employment Rights Act has now been passed into law.\n\nWe recognise people across the country want to see change in their everyday lives. As a result of the decisions this Government has taken, families will see £150 come off their energy bills this year, rail fares will remain frozen for the first time in 30 years and NHS prescription charges will be capped below £10.\n\nThe Government will continue to deliver the manifesto of change that it was elected on.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2026-01-21T15:19:31.697Z","updated_at":"2026-01-21T15:19:31.697Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":null,"transcript_url":"","video_url":"","debate_pack_url":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_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 issue raised by this petition has recently been discussed by MPs in a petitions debate on this topic.\r\n\r\nA debate took place on 12 January 2026 on e-petition 727309, “Call an immediate general election” (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727309).\r\n\r\nWatch the debate: \r\nhttps://www.youtube.com/live/9A_Mm9hZO4o\r\n\r\nRead a transcript of the debate:\r\nhttps://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-12/debates/49F4AFFB-2D48-44D4-AE24-1DC5262CD9C7/a \r\n"},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":757233,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/757233.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not ban social media for under 16s","background":"I think the government shouldn’t ban social media for under 16s. This is because for many young people social media is how they communicate with their friends. Some people view social media as a lifeline. A community, a supportive network. This is why I think the government shouldn’t ban it.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":217682,"created_at":"2026-01-15T16:02:06.325Z","updated_at":"2026-08-12T22:26:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-11T15:24:24.063Z","closed_at":"2026-08-11T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-15T20:43:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-18T15:25:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-03-04T11:01:47.581Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-15T19:03:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-03-04","summary":"The government recognises the benefits of digital technologies, including social media, for children. We are consulting on how to ensure children have an enriching and positive experience online.","details":"I would like to thank all those who signed the petition on this important issue. The government is committed to harnessing the benefits of technology to shape a future that works for us all, particularly for children. To do this, people must have confidence that their children are protected online.\n\nThe Online Safety Act (the ‘Act’) is one of the toughest regimes globally in protecting people from illegal content and activity, and children from harmful and age-inappropriate content. Since the Act has come into effect, the government has ensured keeping children safe online remains a priority and have always said we will take further action as necessary.\n\nWe know parents are grappling with how much screen time their children should have, when to give them a phone, what they are seeing online, and the impact all of this is having. We also know there are growing concerns among parents, carers and those that work with children about AI, including children forming relationships with chatbots as if they were real people.\n\nEvery child deserves the strongest possible start in life, full of love, learning and play. Technology can open up huge opportunities for young people and social media can help children communicate with friends and feel part of a wider community. However, in the age of smartphones, children’s lives are changing rapidly – sometimes faster than families, schools or support services can respond.\n\nThere are calls from across the UK for the government to take action, including calls from many to enforce a social media ban for under 16s. However, as is evident from this petition, opinions on a possible social media ban are divided – with some of the most prominent voices believing that social media ban is not the right answer. This demonstrates that, while there are calls for the government to take action, there is still no consensus on how.\n\nThe government firmly believes that policy making must give proper consideration to a range of views and be rooted in the best available evidence. That is why, on the 2 March 2026, the government launched a consultation to seek further evidence and views on these issues and possible solutions, including on whether there should be a minimum age for social media, and if so, what age would be right. The responses to this consultation will also help shape decisions on:\n• Whether platforms should be required to switch off addictive features that keep children hooked late into the night - like infinite scrolling and autoplay;\n• Whether mandatory overnight curfews would help children sleep better and what age they should apply to;\n• How age verification and age assurance technologies can support effective implementation and;\n• Whether the use of mobile phones in schools should be put on a statutory footing.\n\nThis will be a short, sharp consultation of three months, closing on 26 May 2026, allowing us to hear all perspectives, build consensus where we can, and then act decisively. There will be no delay, and government will explain our next steps by the summer.\n\nWe welcome views from all those with an interest in this issue, including parents, children’s organisations, bereaved families, industry, and children themselves. Alongside the consultation, today we are launching a child‑ and parent‑friendly version to ensure voices in this debate are properly heard. To access the consultation, consultation survey, and child and parent friendly versions of the consultation survey, please follow this link: Growing up in the online world: a national consultation - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/growing-up-in-the-online-world-a-national-consultation).\n\nAlongside the consultation, we are launching a wide-ranging national conversation and piloting potential interventions to ensure future decisions are informed by real-world evidence. We will also look closely at the experience in Australia and their ban for under 16s.\n\nThis consultation is the next step in the government’s work to ensure children’s experiences online are safe and enriching. Together, we are shaping a digital world that reflects our values and protects our children while preparing them for the future in an age of digital technologies and rapid technological change.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation & Technology","created_at":"2026-03-04T11:01:47.578Z","updated_at":"2026-03-04T11:09:33.971Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":725716,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/725716.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect Northern Ireland Veterans from Prosecutions","background":"We think that the Government should not make any changes to legislation that would allow Northern Ireland Veterans to be prosecuted for doing their duty in combating terrorism as part of 'Operation Banner'. (1969-2007)","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":209956,"created_at":"2025-04-22T12:02:34.522Z","updated_at":"2025-11-10T16:55:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-09T09:07:12.736Z","closed_at":"2025-11-09T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-22T18:02:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-10T12:48:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-04T08:14:45.623Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-22T16:45:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-06-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-07-14","debate_outcome_at":"2025-10-15T11:17:37.950Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-03","summary":"The last Government’s Legacy Act was wrong and was found to be unlawful. It was opposed by many, including some families who lost relatives serving in Operation Banner.","details":"This Government's commitment to our Armed Forces community is unshakeable. Veterans who served in Operation Banner ultimately helped bring about the peace that Northern Ireland now enjoys and we owe them a huge debt of gratitude. We will always recognise the extreme circumstances under which our Armed Forces were operating during Operation Banner; the split second judgements that had to be made, and the restraint that was so often required in the face of danger. There will be no rewriting of history. \n\nThe approach taken by the last Government to the legacy of the Troubles was wrong. The Legacy Act - which would have also given immunity to terrorists - has been found to be unlawful and was opposed by many, including families who lost relatives whilst serving in Northern Ireland. Any Government would have to repeal unlawful legislation. This Government is therefore committed to repeal and replace the Legacy Act in a way that is lawful, fair and that enables families, including military families, to find answers.\n\nThe Government recognises the strength of feeling within the veterans and wider armed forces community, especially since the Clonoe Inquest findings in February this year which the Government is appealing. We recognise that legacy mechanisms need to be human rights compliant and be able to command support and confidence across communities, and the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is working closely with the Defence Secretary and Minister for Veterans and People on how to ensure that veterans who engage with legacy processes are fully supported with welfare and, where appropriate, legal support.\n\nAs the Government prepares new legislation, the Secretary for State for Northern Ireland will continue to discuss this issue with all interested parties. The Government owes it to those who were affected by the Troubles across the United Kingdom, including our Armed Forces community, to get this right.\n\nNorthern Ireland Office","created_at":"2025-06-04T08:14:45.620Z","updated_at":"2025-06-04T08:14:45.620Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-07-14","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-07-14/debates/EF85E9A5-B0C4-4F47-AA30-303D0D456657/NorthernIrelandVeteransProsecution","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/OO_CMKBb8K4","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10304/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"NIO","name":"Northern Ireland Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/northern-ireland-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":759385,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/759385.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban anyone convicted of terrorism offences from standing for public office","background":"Introduce a new legal disqualification so people convicted of terrorism offences (in the UK or abroad) cannot stand as candidates or hold elected office, including local councils.","additional_details":"This is needed because current local election disqualification rules focus mainly on recent imprisonment thresholds (for example, being sentenced to 3 months or more within the last 5 years) and therefore may not prevent individuals with serious historic convictions from standing today. The Electoral Commission notes that the returning officer cannot confirm whether a candidate is disqualified and candidates self-declare their eligibility when submitting nomination papers.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":205778,"closing_date":"2026-09-06","created_at":"2026-01-30T15:04:00.665Z","updated_at":"2026-08-18T17:25:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-06T11:41:36.948Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-30T15:26:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-06T15:32:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-04-01T14:09:15.657Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-08T02:39:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-06-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-07-06","debate_outcome_at":"2026-07-07T13:33:41.480Z","creator_name":"Richard James Donaldson","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-06","summary":"We currently have no plans to change the disqualification criteria for these offences. We keep the UK’s broader counter terrorism framework under constant review to ensure it is fit for purpose.","details":"We currently have no plans to change the disqualification criteria for these offences.\n\nCurrently anyone who has been convicted of any offence in the UK and receives a custodial sentence of three months or more, suspended or not, is disqualified for five years from standing or sitting as a member of an English local authority. Candidates must declare that they are not disqualified from standing for or holding local office. Making a false statement is potentially a criminal offence.\n\nOther disqualification criteria applying to councillors in England include:\n• Those under certain bankruptcy restrictions.\n• Those disqualified for illegal or corrupt election practices. \n• Those subject to certain notification requirements or a relevant order relating to sexual offences.\n• Those disqualified when convicted of certain intimidatory criminal offences against certain persons, including candidates of a relevant elective office.\n\nThe UK has one of the strongest counter terrorism frameworks in the world. This includes a range of specialised counter terrorism powers which support detection and disruption of terrorist risk, as well as a robust toolkit for managing terrorist offenders upon their release.  We always keep this framework under review to ensure it is fit for purpose in the context of emerging threats. This is supported through independent scrutiny provided by the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation.\n\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government\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/759385)","created_at":"2026-04-01T14:09:15.655Z","updated_at":"2026-05-20T09:23:55.577Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-07-06","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-07-06/debates/741511B8-2691-42B4-AC0B-209D4F60A838/details","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y90nA0yH6b4","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10929/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MHCLG","name":"Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housing-communities-local-government"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":756036,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/756036.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make all court and tribunal transcripts available free of charge","background":"Make all court and tribunal transcripts available for free. Currently, fees can reach thousands, creating a \"paywall\" for justice. All legal records should be public property to help ensure transparency, allow for fair appeals, and support victims. Access to the law should not depend on wealth.","additional_details":"High transcription costs can create a prohibitive paywall for justice. Private companies can charge thousands for transcriptions, which can effectively bar small-claims litigants from pursuing fair appeals or accessing their own trials. Full transcriptions of the longest trials can cost £20k. Access to the law mustn't be a luxury for the wealthy. We ask the Government to end the private-pay model and provide free digital access to all transcripts to help ensure transparency and equality.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":204129,"created_at":"2026-01-05T15:44:31.884Z","updated_at":"2026-08-05T23:00:09.639Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-05T12:46:37.363Z","closed_at":"2026-08-05T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-05T15:55:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-10T10:50:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:03.037Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-10T19:04:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-23","debate_outcome_at":"2026-05-12T12:12:08.110Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-03-03","summary":"The Government is already increasing transparency in the courts, including expanding free access to Crown Court sentencing remarks.  Going further now would place even more pressure on the system.","details":"The Government is committed to strengthening transparency across the justice system and is already taking significant steps across all jurisdictions.\n\nIn the Crown Court, sentencing remarks are now published online in cases of significant public interest, and judges can also permit broadcasters to film Crown Court sentencing remarks, ensuring greater public visibility of judicial decisions. Victims of rape and serious sexual offences and bereaved families of victims of homicide, manslaughter and fatal road accidents are already entitled to free transcripts of Crown Court sentencing remarks. These can be requested here: Apply for a transcript of a judge's sentencing remarks: Form EX107H (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apply-for-a-transcript-of-a-judges-sentencing-remarks). From Spring 2027, the Government is expanding free access to Crown Court sentencing remarks to all victims, ensuring these remarks are provided in time to support any application to the Unduly Lenient Sentencing Scheme. The Government's ongoing reform of the criminal courts will further enhance transparency by making sure all hearings in magistrates courts are recorded.\n\nIn the family court, the Government has also been working to support the judiciary to increase the number of family court judgments that are published in anonymised form, while ensuring the privacy and protection of children and families involved in proceedings.  On more targeted transparency measures, the Government is working with the judiciary to roll out new provisions relating to Transparency Orders across England and Wales, providing a clear framework for reporting where a journalist or legal blogger has attended a family court hearing. Since 29 September 2025, provisions relating to Transparency Orders have applied to all children’s cases. \n\nIn civil proceedings, litigants in England and Wales do not need to pay for the written order or judgment relating to their own case; this is sent to all parties involved, setting out the court’s reasoning for the decision, which parties can refer to if they wish to appeal that decision.\n\nIn tribunal proceedings, any judicial decision and the reasons will be provided to the parties unless there has been an order restricting that. Many of the major tribunal chambers also allow parties to proceedings to request fuller written reasons for tribunal decisions for no additional cost. \n\nThe Ministry of Justice is also working with the judiciary and His Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service to consider the procedural, operational and resource requirements of implementing the publishing of written reasons for decisions in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal, to improve transparency and public understanding.\n\nWhile the Government remains committed to continuing to improve transparency across the justice system, this has to be balanced against our capacity to deliver existing priorities and commitments. Making all court and tribunal transcripts available for free would create significant financial and operational pressure at a time when we are focused on rolling out free sentencing remarks for all victims, and when the wider justice system is under considerable pressure. Producing an accurate court or tribunal transcript is a resource-intensive process. Full hearing or trial transcripts are particularly expensive due to their length and the level of quality assurance required to ensure they are accurate and safeguard personal data. Ensuring compliance with reporting restrictions is also central to the release of any court transcript, including vulnerable parties are protected and sensitive details are not inadvertently released.\n\nThe Government is committed to upholding the principle of open justice, including embracing AI and exploring the opportunities it offers to produce court and tribunal transcripts more quickly and cost-effectively, while still meeting the necessary accuracy and safeguarding standards. \n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:03.033Z","updated_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:29.587Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-23","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-23/debates/7F5059FE-61DE-4D0E-B895-9884D2533331/CourtAndTribunalTranscripts","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SoPyKyqh9o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10592/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700682,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700682.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Urgently fulfil humanitarian obligations to Gaza","background":"Act to ensure deliverer of fuel, food, aid, life saving services etc. We think this shouldn't be dependant/on condition of Israeli facilitation as the Knesset voted against UNWRA access to Gaza. We think if military delivery of aid, airdrops, peacekeepers etc, are needed, then all be considered.","additional_details":"Israel does not agree to ceasefire and does not permit UNWRA access. We think the UK must find alternative means to deliver aid. We believe this must done urgently with urgent deadlines, with or without Israeli support.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":198966,"created_at":"2024-11-04T08:27:03.849Z","updated_at":"2026-03-16T17:10:20.521Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-28T14:16:15.231Z","closed_at":"2025-07-28T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-04T20:15:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-26T14:10:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.448Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-25T07:00:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-24","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-25T10:25:44.805Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-08","summary":"The UK is funding aid, supporting air drops and evacuations, urging Israel to ease restrictions, and pressing for safe, large-scale UN-led aid delivery via land into Gaza.","details":"On 29 July, the IPC issued an alert warning that the worst-case scenario of famine is unfolding. The humanitarian situation is appalling – starvation, malnutrition and disease are driving hunger-related deaths. All routes to deliver humanitarian aid into Gaza are controlled by and must be approved by the Government of Israel. The UK has taken steps to alleviate the humanitarian situation through our advocacy and funding the humanitarian response, as well as supporting air drops and preparing for medical evacuations of children.\n\nIsrael has now agreed to impose 10-hour “tactical pauses” and ease restrictions on aid though we are yet to see a real change on the ground. However, the UK is pressing for permanent change to enable the UN and humanitarian partners (including NGOs) to deliver life-saving aid, safely and at-scale. The UN and humanitarian partners have the systems and expertise to deliver aid – they must be enabled to deliver aid safely and at-scale. Israel must work with the UN, and all partners to continue to facilitate a surge of aid into Gaza. Fully re-instating commercial deliveries will be key to sustaining the flow of aid.\n\nThe UK has also taken immediate steps to help alleviate the humanitarian situation, including air drops of humanitarian supplies along with Jordan and preparing to get injured children out of Gaza and into British hospitals. Throughout the conflict, the UK has collaborated with regional partners on alternative routes for aid to get into Gaza, including air drops and a maritime corridor. However, we are clear that these cannot substitute delivery by land, which remains the best way to get aid in at the scale required. This FY (25/26), the UK has announced £101m funding for the OPTs, including £60m for humanitarian assistance, £20m of which is for UNRWA.\n\nOn 21 July, the UK signed a joint statement with 31 partners that warned the suffering of Gazans had reached new depths, pressing for immediate lifting of restrictions on the flow of aid and calling for the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life-saving work safely and effectively. On 19 May, the UK signed a joint donor statement on the humanitarian situation in Gaza calling for a full resumption of aid and for Israel to allow the UN and other aid organisations to operate independently. \n\nForeign, Commonwealth & Development Office","created_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.445Z","updated_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.445Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-24","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-24/debates/8BB76C8A-F2FE-4705-9BB5-563E49C2D641/GazaHumanitarianObligations","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/h91WfAZi2tw?si=wK3jrLpFuNVmzPzr","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10235/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":732559,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732559.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council approved events only","background":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public to minimise the harm caused to vulnerable people and animals. Defenceless animals can die from the distress caused by fireworks.\r\n\r\nI believe that permitting unregulated use of fireworks is an act of wide-scale cruelty to animals.","additional_details":" \r\n \r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":195930,"created_at":"2025-07-06T14:27:42.186Z","updated_at":"2026-07-25T11:52:43.852Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-20T10:08:00.535Z","closed_at":"2026-02-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-06T20:30:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T18:36:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.287Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-09T20:23:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:23:55.089Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-18","summary":"The Government recognises the negative impact fireworks can have on some people and animals.  However, when used responsibly they are a source of enjoyment for many people. ","details":"The Government’s intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, while reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused.\n\nAt this point in time the Government does not have any plans to ban the sale of fireworks to consumers. We have launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside encouraging people to consider going to a public display. Public displays are more likely to be well-publicised, providing people with an opportunity to prepare ahead of the display taking place. The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks. This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately. My safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA regulatory framework currently controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks to consumers. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine.  There is also a maximum noise level of 120 decibels with many retailers also offering ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks.\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.  \n\nTo inform any future action the Government will continue to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.  \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.285Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T12:57:00.440Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DBIST","name":"Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728715,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728715.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review possible penalties for social media posts, including the use of prison","background":"We call on the Government to urgently review the possible penalties for non-violent offences arising from social media posts, including the use of prison. ","additional_details":"There is serious public concern about the proportionality of sentencing in cases involving opinion-based online speech. We believe imprisoning individuals for posts on social media sets a dangerous precedent and raises wider questions about freedom of expression, proportionality in sentencing, and the misuse of limited prison resources. We consider that alternative sanctions, such as fines or community service, would be more appropriate.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":191591,"created_at":"2025-05-27T18:05:08.578Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.084Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-20T12:02:52.796Z","closed_at":"2025-12-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-27T18:12:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-20T15:14:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-07T12:07:13.039Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-21T09:35:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-10-31","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-17","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-18T10:17:47.743Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-25","summary":"The government is committed to ensuring penalties are proportionate and uphold freedom of expression.","details":"Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of our democratic society. It is a long-standing tradition in this country that people are free to demonstrate their views, however uncomfortable these may be to the majority. The government is committed to protecting this right while also ensuring that laws are in place to address harmful, criminal behaviour.\n\nThe UK’s Online Safety Act 2023 (“the Act”) reflects this careful balance. It requires platforms to take proportionate steps to tackle illegal content and protect children from harmful material. At the same time, it has been designed to safeguard legal free speech, uphold privacy, and support innovation. The Act does not prevent adults from accessing legal content, nor does it restrict people from posting content that others may find offensive. It is not about individual posts. Instead, Ofcom will assess the systems and processes platforms have in place to manage risks and respond to harm. There are also protections against the over-removal of content, ensuring that lawful speech is not wrongly taken down.\n\nWhere an individual is convicted for an offence related to opinion-based online speech, the independent judiciary are responsible for determining appropriate sentences based on the facts of each case and the relevant sentencing guidelines.  The sentencing framework provides courts with a range of sentencing powers alongside imprisonment, including fines, community sentences, and suspended sentences. The law also makes clear that imprisonment should only be imposed where no other sentence would be appropriate.\n\nThe government commissioned a comprehensive review of sentencing powers through the Sentencing Review. This was a wide-ranging and evidence-led process that examined the full spectrum of sentencing options—from fines and community orders to custodial sentences—to ensure the framework is robust, proportionate, and fit for purpose.\n\nThe government has accepted the majority of the Review’s recommendations in principle and intends to legislate to implement them as soon as Parliamentary time allows. This includes targeted reforms to strengthen public protection and reduce reoffending.\n\nWe do not consider it necessary or appropriate to revisit the sentencing framework and we currently have no plans to review the penalties for these types of offences.\n\nWe are committed to ensuring that our justice system protects the public, upholds fundamental rights, and uses custodial sentences only where they are necessary and proportionate. \n\nMinistry of Justice\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/728715)","created_at":"2025-07-07T12:07:13.037Z","updated_at":"2025-09-03T12:56:39.563Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-17","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-17/debates/336B2076-DEEC-4137-B2A1-2431F12C2A71/SocialMediaPostsPenaltiesForOffences","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP3uuuZGxvE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0214/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":702074,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702074.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Prohibit publishers irrevocably disabling video games they have already sold","background":"The government should update consumer law to prohibit publishers from disabling video games (and related game assets / features) they have already sold without recourse for customers to retain or repair them. We seek this as a statutory consumer right.","additional_details":"Most video games sold can work indefinitely, but some have design elements that render the product non-functional at a time which the publisher controls, with no date provided at sale. We see this as a form of planned obsolescence, as customers can be deprived of their purchase and cannot retain or repair the game. We think this practice is hostile to consumers, entirely preventable, and have concerns existing laws do not address the problem.  Thus, we believe government intervention is needed.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":189887,"created_at":"2024-11-17T19:01:47.912Z","updated_at":"2025-11-04T10:35:11.895Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-14T10:00:44.542Z","closed_at":"2025-07-14T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-18T16:22:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-18T10:50:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-03T15:09:54.335Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-02T15:50:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-03","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T10:35:11.895Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-03","summary":"There are no plans to amend UK consumer law on disabling video games. Those selling games must comply with existing requirements in consumer law and we will continue to monitor this issue.","details":"The Government recognises concerns raised by video games users regarding the operability of purchased products. As the lead department for video games, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) regularly engages industry representatives and monitors how consumers interact with games. We work with the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) as the lead department for consumer protection more generally.\n\nWe are aware of issues relating to the life-span of digital content, including video games, and we appreciate the concerns of players of some games that have been discontinued. We have no plans to amend existing consumer law on digital obsolescence, but we will monitor this issue and consider the relevant work of the Competition and Market Authority (CMA) on consumer rights and consumer detriment.\n\nVideo games sellers must comply with existing consumer law – this includes the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs). We have provided details of relevant protections below. However, there is no requirement in UK law for software companies to support older versions of their products. Decision-making is for those companies, taking account of commercial and regulatory factors and complying with existing consumer law. There may be occasions where companies make decisions based on the high running costs of maintaining older servers for games with declining user bases. \n\nThe CRA gives consumers important rights when they make a contract with a trader for the supply of digital content, requiring it to be of satisfactory quality, fit for a particular purpose and as described by the seller. It may be difficult and expensive for businesses to maintain support for old software, particularly if it needs to interact with new technologies. However, if software is offered for sale that is not supported by the provider, then this should be made clear, for example on product webpages and physical packaging. \n\nIf digital content does not meet these quality rights, the consumer is entitled to a repair or replacement or, if not possible, some money back up to 100% of the cost of the digital content. These rights apply to intangible digital content like a PC game, as well as tangible content like a physical copy of a game. The CRA has a limit of up to six years after a breach of contract during which a consumer can take legal action.\n\nA trader or third party can upgrade and improve the features of digital content so long as it continues to match any description given by the trader and conforms with any pre-contract information provided by the trader, unless varied by express agreement. \n\nIn addition, the CRA requires that the terms and conditions applied by a trader to a product they sell must not be unfair and must be prominent and transparent. If not, they may also be challenged and the question of fairness is a matter for the courts. Terms found to be unfair are not binding on the consumer.\n\nThe CPRs require information to consumers to be clear and correct and prohibit commercial practices which through false information or misleading omissions cause the average consumer to make a different choice. As such, the regulations prohibit commercial practices which omit or hide information which the average consumer needs to make an informed choice, and prohibits traders from providing material information in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner. If consumers are led to believe that a game will remain playable indefinitely for certain systems, despite the end of physical support, the CPRs may require that the game remains technically feasible (for example, available offline) to play under those circumstances. \n\nThe CPRs are enforced by Trading Standards and the CMA. If consumers believe that there has been a breach of these regulations, they should report it to the Citizens Advice helpline (or Advice Direct Scotland for those living in Scotland) which is a free service advising on rights and how to take their case forward. The helplines will refer complaints to Trading Standards and CMA where appropriate. Consumers can also pursue private redress through the courts where a trader has provided misleading information on a product.\n\nThe CPRs section of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act 2024 is expected to come into effect in April 2025. It restates and updates the CPRs into primary legislation, revokes the 2008 regulations and sets out rules around unfair trading. The Act:\n● Provides the Secretary of State with the power to add, amend, or remove a description of a commercial practice which are in all circumstances considered unfair \n● Provides clarification that someone facilitating supply or promotion of a product is a ‘trader’ and must comply with consumer law\n\nThe use of this power will be kept under review – any amendments proposed are subject to a duty to consult with stakeholders and approval by both Houses of Parliament.\nDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2025-02-03T15:09:54.332Z","updated_at":"2025-02-03T15:11:52.599Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-04","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-03/debates/C603C07C-1BB5-41EF-A3C1-1AE1FEBBB95D/VideoGamesConsumerLaw","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/ONX2KUhyFow","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0195/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":750612,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750612.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Legislate to require drivers to report collisions with cats","background":"It is legal in the UK to hit a cat when driving and not need to stop or report collisions, leaving them scared, alone, and in pain. Cats are important, loved, valued family members for many and we believe the law should reflect this.","additional_details":"We want the Government to legislate to require drivers to stop, check and report any road collisions with cats if they’re injured on the road, and holds drivers accountable if they fail to stop and report a collision involving a cat on the basis they left a cat to unnecessarily suffer. We believe asking drivers to be made responsible for seeking help for an injured cat is a perfectly reasonable & simple ask.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":189192,"created_at":"2025-11-13T14:11:41.146Z","updated_at":"2026-06-18T21:36:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-17T09:04:32.079Z","closed_at":"2026-06-17T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-13T14:31:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-11T19:56:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-03T15:00:02.976Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-07T21:52:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-03","summary":"The Government has no current plans to require drivers to report collisions with cats. However, the Road Safety Strategy will improve road safety for all road users, including cats and other animals.","details":"Improving road safety is one of the Department’s highest priorities.\n\nOn 7 January 2026, we published our new Road Safety Strategy, setting out our vision for a safer future on our roads for all. The Strategy sets an ambitious target to reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on British roads by 65% by 2035. This target will focus the efforts of road safety partners across Britain, with measures to improve road design, protect vulnerable road users, and review motoring offences. All of this will be supported and monitored by a new Road Safety Board chaired by the Minister for Local Transport.\n\nRoad safety is a shared responsibility, and this strategy reflects that. It considers action needed by government, local authorities, industry, emergency services and communities to tackle the causes of collisions and save lives. By investing in infrastructure, education, and enforcement, we are taking decisive steps to make our roads safer for everyone, which will in turn reduce the risk to all animals.\n\nThis is a compassionate country and although there is no obligation to report all animal deaths on roads, drivers should, if possible, make enquiries to ascertain the owner of domestic animals, such as cats, and advise them of the situation.\n\nUnder section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a driver is required to stop and report an accident involving specified animals including horses, cattle, ass, mules, sheep, pigs, goats or dogs, but not cats or wild animals. This requirement arises from their status as working animals rather than as domestic pets. To introduce such a measure within the provision of section 170, would require primary legislation. (Note that certain legislation still uses the word ‘accident’, although the preferred terms are collision or crash.)\n\nBecause cats are much smaller than other specified animals, and often most active at dawn or dusk, in many cases drivers may not be aware they’ve hit them – particularly with larger vehicles. Because of that, it would be difficult to prosecute drivers if the law was changed.\n\nIn June 2024, the Government introduced compulsory cat microchipping to help reunite lost and stray cats. All cats in England over 20 weeks of age must be microchipped and registered on a compliant database, unless exempt or free-living. The legislation is intended to improve pet welfare by increasing the likelihood of reuniting lost or stray pet cats with their keepers. Defra works closely with stakeholders to communicate pet microchipping requirements to the public.\n\nDefra has also commissioned a research project to understand the operational challenges that currently prevent some cats from being reunited with their keepers after a road traffic collision. The project will provide an evidence base to inform best practice for local authorities and is due to report later this year.\n\nAs set out in the Animal welfare strategy for England, DEFRA will work with the pet microchip database industry to develop improvements to the way the microchipping regime currently operates to make it easier for vets and other users to access records digitally and improve the accuracy of data. DEFRA will also continue to support the roll out of cat microchipping.\n\nDepartment for Transport","created_at":"2026-02-03T15:00:02.973Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T15:00:25.431Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727360,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727360.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep the 5-Year ILR pathway for existing Skilled Worker visa holders","background":"Do not apply the proposed 10-year ILR rule to existing Skilled Worker visa holders. Keep the 5-year ILR route for those already in the UK on this visa. Apply any changes only to new applicants from the date of implementation.","additional_details":"Many skilled visa holders moved to the UK for better opportunities and in return have contributed to the UK economy, paid taxes, and supported critical sectors like health, care, and engineering. We think that changing ILR rules mid-journey is unfair and causes stress for families. Apply the 10-year rule only to future Skilled Worker entrants, not those already building a life here under the current system.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":188125,"created_at":"2025-05-12T16:07:54.265Z","updated_at":"2025-12-12T16:34:17.043Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-23T11:09:16.240Z","closed_at":"2025-11-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T16:17:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-23T16:12:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.149Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-25T13:21:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-07-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-09-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-09-09T09:43:08.564Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-17","summary":"As with several other measures in the Immigration White Paper, the proposals on earned settlement will be subject to a formal consultation process, and we welcome this contribution to that process.","details":"The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, includes proposals for Earned Settlement.\n\nSettlement in the UK is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. Settlement is also an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nThere were 162,000 grants of settlement in 2024, up 35% from 2023. This rise reflects the increase in individuals coming to the UK between 2015 and 2019 on entry clearance visas who have since become eligible for settlement and citizenship. As things stand, more people are likely to become eligible for settlement and then citizenship over the next few years as a result of the extremely high level of net migration between 2019 and 2024.\n\nThe share of people who go on to claim settlement varies considerably by the type of visa people were initially granted to enter the UK, 18% of those coming on work visas between 2010 and 2018 secured settlement by 2023, compared to 75% on the Family route.\n\nIt has been a long-standing principle that settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. Under the current system settlement is primarily qualified for on the basis of length of time spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\n\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in our country and they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\n\nWe therefore intend to reform our settlement rules by expanding the Points-Based System and increasing the standard qualifying period for settlement to ten years. \n\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\n\nWe will continue to offer a shorter pathway to settlement for non-UK dependants of British citizens to five years, who have remained compliant with their requirements, and we will retain existing safeguards to protect the vulnerable, including settlement rights for victims of domestic violence and abuse.\n\nWe will consult on the details of the proposed policy changes later this year, including any proposed transitional arrangements for those already in the UK. These are important changes. We recognise how important this issue is to people, and we will listen carefully to what they tell us in that consultation. \n\nWe are grateful to the petitioners for setting out their views on this announcement ahead of that consultation process, and we look forward to hearing from them again when they have had the opportunity to study the final proposals in detail.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.141Z","updated_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.141Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-09-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-09-08/debates/25EC2767-BBFF-4FE8-8F52-65B2C28CED10/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/sGBlfyO5VhI?si=qz7pcnWmcaYyv4CI","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0172/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum noise level for consumer fireworks from 120 to 90 decibels","background":"We think each year, individuals suffer because of loud fireworks. We believe horses, dogs, cats, livestock and wildlife can be terrified by noisy fireworks and many people find them intolerable.","additional_details":"There is independent research suggesting: \r\n\r\n• Over half of dog owners report fireworks-anxiety in their dog\r\n• There’s an 81% increase in missing dogs around Bonfire Night\r\n• Almost 25% of military veterans say fireworks have caused a negative experience for them\r\n\r\nWe think both humans and animals are less likely to be distressed by fireworks noise below 90dB. We believe lower noise levels would allow fireworks to be enjoyed while potentially reducing some of their many negative impacts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":184376,"created_at":"2025-08-18T08:48:05.528Z","updated_at":"2026-07-25T11:54:43.280Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T13:29:13.913Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-18T09:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T15:43:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.890Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T14:00:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:22:32.649Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-07","summary":"The Government recognises that some people have strong feelings about fireworks and has been listening to concerns raised by members of the public regarding the impact of firework noise.","details":"The Government's intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property.  Current regulations control their sale, availability, and use, including setting a maximum noise level of 120 decibels for consumer fireworks. Many retailers also offer ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks which are available to purchase by consumers.\n\nFireworks, when used responsibly are a source of enjoyment for many people.  The Government recognises however the concerns raised by signatories to this petition regarding the potential impact fireworks can have on communities and animals.  \n\nThe Government is engaging with businesses, consumer groups and charities to better understand the issues with and impacts of fireworks. Noise is one of the key issues we are seeking views on. The Government is also considering the experience of other countries where lower noise limits are in place for consumer fireworks to understand the impact this has had and to identify best practice.\n\nFor this fireworks season, to ensure people continue to use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner, the Government has launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside considerate use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.  The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks.  \n\nMy safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used. \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade\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/738192)","created_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.887Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T15:28:36.600Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"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":[]}}]}