{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=1&state=open","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=open","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=86&state=open","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2&state=open","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":767687,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/767687.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Hold a UK-wide briefing on climate and nature risks","background":"The UK faces growing risks from climate and nature breakdown - from extreme weather to economic disruption and national security threats. Yet the public has never been given a clear national briefing on the scale of these risks. Government should hold an emergency briefing from leading experts.","additional_details":"These risks could have serious consequences across UK society, with threats to health and food supply - which could become irreversible if without urgent action. Many people are unclear how these risks may affect them, and information in the public domain is often misleading.\r\n \r\nA credible national briefing from independent experts would give people clear, trusted guidance on what these risks mean in practice, and what we can do - both together and individually - to prepare and respond.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":128826,"closing_date":"2026-11-20","created_at":"2026-04-18T21:09:56.887Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:26:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-20T08:54:04.640Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-19T09:38:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-21T12:08:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-15T10:54:01.418Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-16T09:55:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Christopher Packham","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-15","summary":"We recognise the growing risks from climate and nature breakdown, and are committed to speaking clearly about the scale of the crisis and providing reliable sources for information and advice.","details":"The UK government recognises the growing risks from climate and nature breakdown. Nature and a stable climate underpin our health, economy, national security and critical services.\n\nThe National Emergency Briefing campaign is right to highlight climate change as a major threat for the UK and the world as set out in our ‘National security assessment on global ecosystems’ in January 2026.\n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nature-security-assessment-on-global-biodiversity-loss-ecosystem-collapse-and-national-security\n\nThe government welcomes their work and we are committed to speaking clearly about the scale of the crisis.\n\nIn July 2025, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband MP, alongside the then Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Steve Reed MP, gave the first-ever statement on the State of Climate and Nature.\n\nThe statement provided an honest appraisal of the state of climate and nature in the UK and the action being taken to benefit people now, as well as future generations, demonstrating how the choices we make as a country influence the course of global action. To promote the statement, the Energy Secretary spoke to national broadcasters and newspapers about the threat of climate change to our British way of life, securing widespread coverage across print, online and broadcast.\n\nWe intend to undertake a second statement this summer to demonstrate the scale of the challenge and emphasise the steps that the government and UK citizens are taking to prepare and respond to the climate and nature crisis.\n\nWe recognise that climate risks are increasing in urgency across sectors and we need to go further and faster to ensure that our country, communities and natural environment are resilient to climate change. We have committed to strengthening our approach and are working together across government to deliver actions to improve our resilience.  We will set out stronger adaptation objectives for a more ambitious fourth National Adaptation Programme (NAP4) in 2028.\n\nWe already communicate with the public about the urgency of these issues and provide reliable sources for information and advice. The Adverse Weather and Health Plan (AWHP), which forms part of the Third National Adaptation Programme, brings together the Weather-Health Alerting System (in collaboration with the Met Office) and practical guidance to reduce health impacts from events such as heat, flooding and drought. The AWHP adopts a whole-of-society approach, aiming to strengthen public and organisational communication, enhance resilience, and support both preparedness and effective response to protect health across society now and in the future.\n\nAt the same time, we are restoring and protecting nature. In December 2025, we published the revised Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP). The EIP is the government’s long-term plan for improving the natural environment and the enjoyment of it. It clearly describes the actions we need to take and who is responsible for delivering them. This will help us to restore nature, improve environmental quality, create a circular economy, protect environmental security and improve people’s access to nature.\n\nWe are also taking action to reduce the impact of climate change on food production and to support the continued production and supply of food for UK citizens. We rely upon a combination of strong domestic production from the UK’s agricultural and food manufacturing sectors and a diverse range of overseas supply sources to ensure a consistent supply of food. We are providing support through our farming schemes to improve sector resilience and through innovation. For example, Defra’s Crop Genetic Improvement Networks funds research to develop crop varieties that are more productive, sustainable, and more resilient to climate change.\n\nThe Simpler Recycling reforms ensure that across England, people are able to recycle the same materials, whether at home, work or school.  In particular, collecting food waste separately from residual waste allows us to send it for anaerobic digestion or composting. This reduces the amount of food waste going to landfill, where it releases harmful greenhouse gases, helping to achieve our Net Zero strategy target to eliminate biodegradable waste sent to landfill from 2028.\n\nWe recognise we will only succeed if we take people with us and act together. That is why we are ensuring the public has a voice in how we create a more sustainable and more prosperous society. We published Energising Britain, the UK’s first public participation plan. This plan sets out how we will work to ensure people have the facts and understand the scale, pace of change and benefits of climate and nature action, and the benefits to their local communities. It includes working with businesses and communities to ensure everyone can benefit from our mission, including through policies that are responsive to people's needs and views. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-06-15T10:54:01.415Z","updated_at":"2026-06-15T10:58:26.161Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764268,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764268.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect legal right to support for children with SEND","background":"I believe that the Government’s proposed SEND reforms could limit EHCPs, weaken legal rights, replace individual plans with packages, reduce appeals, and remove school choice. In my view, children could be left without the support they need as a result.","additional_details":"I think the Government’s SEND reforms could limit EHCPs, weaken legal rights, raise thresholds, replace individual plans with generic packages, reduce appeal rights, remove school choice, and push children into inclusion zones without proper support. Many children rely on these rights to support every day, without them many could be left behind, struggling, unsupported, and unheard.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":115198,"closing_date":"2026-10-14","created_at":"2026-03-13T19:29:47.335Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-14T14:49:10.055Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-13T19:59:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-03T13:09:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-22T13:21:27.888Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-30T16:32:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Tee-Jay Chetwynd","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-22","summary":"The government’s SEND reform proposal will strengthen legal duties, better support children with SEND in mainstream settings and ensure EHCPs secure statutory support for children with complex needs.","details":"The government’s proposed reforms strengthen the legal duties to support children with SEND in mainstream settings. The SEND consultation proposes a new legal requirement for schools to create individual support plans (ISPs) for all children with SEND, developed by their nursery, school or college in discussion with parents, children and any other professionals such as healthcare experts involved in that child’s care. ISPs would evolve with the child’s needs, enable information about their needs and support to transfer with them as a digital record throughout the education system ensuring support can be planned and parents aren’t having to retell stories or repeatedly fight for support, ultimately helping to transform the life chances of children with SEND. EHCPs will continue for children with complex needs, securing statutory right to education and healthcare support. \n\nUnder our proposed reforms, educational provision in a reformed EHCP would be underpinned by evidence-based specialist provision packages commissioned by local authorities (LAs) and delivered by settings. Because settings know the child or young person best, we propose they work with families before EHCPs are finalised to set out the provision aligned with the package(s) that the child needs. Settings will have a legal duty to deliver what is in the EHCP.\n\nEffective early identification and intervention is critical in improving the outcomes of children and young people with SEND. To support schools to meet this legal duty, we have appointed an Independent Expert Panel to  develop National Inclusion Standards. The Standards  should set out minimum standards that all settings must adhere to, and include a range of evidence-informed tools, strategies and approaches for educators to draw on to identify and support children and young people with additional needs. With earlier identification and a more inclusive mainstream, children and young people with SEND should get the support they need, as soon as they need it. This will be backed by investment of £1.6 billion over the next three years for early years settings, schools and colleges to deliver whole school approaches and individual support in line with the National Inclusion Standards.\n\nIn addition, we are investing £1.8 billion over the next three years for local area partnerships, including local authorities and Integrated Care Boards, to develop a new Experts at Hand offer. This offer is designed to strengthen the capability of mainstream education settings by providing access to support from health and specialist education practitioners, including speech and language therapists,  support workers or assistants, occupational therapists and support workers or assistants, educational psychologists and trainees, and specialist teachers, both local authority-based and those based in specialist or alternative provision settings. \n\nThis new offer is designed to meet children’s needs earlier and more effectively without needing to wait for a diagnosis or bureaucratic assessment processes. Expert health and education staff will work alongside nursery workers and school and college staff to embed effective interventions, provide training and upskilling and help to accurately identify and assess need.\n\nTo support delivery, over £40 million is being invested in the specialist workforce, including £26 million to train more educational psychologists and £15 million to support more speech and language therapists to work with education settings.\n\nThe package of proposed reforms aims to put an end to the postcode lottery in support ensuring there are clear national standards for the support every child with SEND should receive. We are reforming the statutory needs assessment, co-designing with families, education and healthcare experts to deliver high quality, fair assessments across the country. Alongside this both EHCPs and ISPs will have a new digital template meaning they can move easily with children and families and preventing the need for reassessments and new local processes if children move between local authority areas.\n\nUnder our proposed reforms, the SEND Tribunal would remain a legal backstop for the most important EHC decisions. We propose strengthening mediation services to encourage families to work closely with local authorities and settings to develop solutions to problems, without the need for a Tribunal appeal, in line with the best practice currently seen in some local authorities. However, if early resolution is not possible, under our proposed reforms, parents and young people would be able to appeal to the Tribunal about:\n\no   a local authority’s refusal to assess whether a child or young person needs an EHCP\no   whether a child or young person needs a Specialist Provision Package and therefore needs an EHCP\no   which Specialist Provision Package(s) the child or young person should have\no   the local authority’s decision about which school or setting should be named in the EHCP – although we propose to amend the Tribunal’s existing powers so that it can require the LA to retake the decision, rather than the Tribunal deciding which school or setting should be named in the EHCP.\no   a decision to amend, not amend or cease an EHCP following review.\n\nWe have recently welcomed feedback via the consultation on 'SEND reform: putting children and young people first’, which ran for 12 weeks closing on 18 May. We are reviewing responses alongside feedback from over 200 engagement events held over the 12 weeks.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-06-22T13:21:27.883Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T13:22:17.875Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764785,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764785.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Support the Ceramics Industry and protect British manufacturing jobs and skills","background":"Apply energy intensive industry relief (Supercharger scheme) to the ceramics industry to help cut soaring industrial energy costs & support ceramics businesses, which are at the risk of imminent collapse without urgent intervention, as seen with Denby Pottery registering for administration support.","additional_details":"Urgently review the British Industrial Supercharger and expand it to include the ceramics industry within its remit, and produce a policy statement about the Government’s policy to protect and support industry and jobs.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":111211,"closing_date":"2026-10-17","created_at":"2026-03-19T10:58:30.234Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T10:56:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-17T10:31:36.749Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-19T11:11:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-17T19:42:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-11T14:11:06.936Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-07T07:20:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-06-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-07-06","debate_outcome_at":"2026-07-07T15:51:07.776Z","creator_name":"Hayley Baddiley","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-11","summary":"The Government intends to publicly consult on the eligibility of the British Industry Supercharger this year. However, consultation outcomes, including future sector inclusion, cannot be pre-empted.","details":"The British Industry Supercharger delivers targeted relief to eligible energy-intensive industries (EIIs) for their electricity policy and network costs on the basis of their high exposure to carbon leakage, the offshoring of production and jobs to overseas competitors who do not face equivalent climate change policy controls.\n\nThe current list of eligible sectors is set out in secondary legislation under the Electricity Supplier Obligations (Amendment & Excluded Electricity) Regulations 2015 (as amended), the Electricity Capacity (Supplier Payment etc.) (Amended and Excluded Electricity) Regulations 2024, and the Energy-Intensive Industry Electricity Support Payments and Levy Regulations 2024) (as amended).\n\nThe Department for Business and Trade (DBT) intends to review the eligibility criteria for the British Industry Supercharger this year, as referred to in the Minister for Industry’s response to a parliamentary question (UIN 128253) tabled on 20 April 2026, to ensure that current government policy remains targeted, effective and proportionate. However, any changes to eligibility criteria under the scheme are subject to public consultation, and approval from the UK Parliament and government ministers. While an exact date has not been provided as to when this consultation will begin, DBT encourages the ceramics sector to engage with this review and submit all relevant evidence when the opportunity arises.\n\nThe Government has set out its actions to support UK industry and boost economic growth in our Modern Industrial Strategy. Through targeted support to IS-8 and frontier industries, the Government will improve resilience of supply chains, increase trading opportunities, and reduce regulatory burdens. Support to these strategic sectors will not only improve economic growth but also create jobs up and down the country. However, all industries will have a role to play in revitalising our economy.\n\nThe Government recognises the importance of the ceramics sector to many communities, particularly the deep importance of the tableware industry to Stoke-on-Trent. The ceramics industry has faced difficult economic circumstances, exacerbated by an uncertain geopolitical environment. The Government will continue to engage with the industry, trade unions and the sector’s main trade association, Ceramics UK, to better understand their challenges and explore how they can best be supported.\n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2026-05-11T14:11:06.933Z","updated_at":"2026-05-11T14:11:06.933Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-07-06","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-07-06/debates/F440907D-DDB1-478E-8238-572A6A863070/CeramicsIndustry","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/krG9tsSXbls?si=S9IuG6xv4hjWLCiy&t=263","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10932/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","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":769589,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/769589.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End the mandatory fortification of white flour with folic acid immediately","background":"We call on the Government to stop the fortification of flour with synthetic folic acid. Folic acid is a medicine not a food. We believe it is unethical to mass medicate the entire population without their knowledge or consent in the hope that a minority group of people might see a benefit.","additional_details":"The NHS website lists sections of the population (including people with cancer, a stent or low vitamin B12 levels) who should avoid folic acid exposure because of possible detrimental health impacts. Even if these people are aware of the issue, it is becoming harder to avoid as wholemeal and gluten free products are voluntarily adding folic acid. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":109850,"closing_date":"2026-12-08","created_at":"2026-05-11T11:31:25.296Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:27:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-08T14:36:09.331Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-11T11:47:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-12T15:02:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:00.293Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-10-08T18:12:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Dr Clare Craig","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-29","summary":"Folic acid fortification is an evidenced public health measure, not a medical intervention. The policy applies to non-wholemeal flour, reflecting the flour-type already subject to fortification.","details":"The UK Government is mandating fortification of non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid with the primary objective to increase folic acid intake among women of childbearing age, thereby improving blood folate levels and reducing the risk of neural tube defects (NTDs) during pregnancy. The policy is projected to prevent around 200 NTD-affected pregnancies annually—approximately 20 per cent of UK cases. The population-level policy will have the wider benefit of increasing the intake of folic acid and improving folate status across the whole population. Folate, including folic acid, plays an important role in forming healthy red blood cells and maintaining brain health.\n\nPrevious efforts through public health campaigns to promote supplementation, as well as voluntary fortification by manufacturers, have had limited success. Despite longstanding UK public health advice recommending a daily supplement of 400 micrograms of folic acid before conception and during early pregnancy, uptake remains suboptimal, particularly among younger women and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Since almost half of pregnancies in the UK are unplanned, many women may not take supplements during the critical early weeks of gestation.\n\nThe policy has been carefully designed to be proportionate, targeting non-wholemeal wheat flour because it is widely consumed across the population and is the most effective vehicle for delivering the intended public health benefits. This approach is consistent with long-standing UK fortification requirements for wheat flour, including the mandatory addition of calcium, iron, niacin and thiamine, which also apply to non-wholemeal wheat flour produced to organic standards. Not fortifying wider than the type of flour that is presently fortified, means that individuals can avoid fortified flour if they choose to or need to. This includes wholemeal flour, gluten-free products and other flour types such as soya or spelt flour.\n\nTo ensure people can easily identify products that are suitable for them, added vitamins and minerals, including folic acid, must be labelled in the product’s ingredients list. This must also be declared when fortified flour is used as an ingredient.\n\nThe decision to fortify non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid has a long history and has been considered both by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), which advises the four UK governments on nutrition-related matters, and its predecessor, the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy. Folic acid fortification was recommended by the SACN in 2006, after an extensive review of the evidence on folate and health, which is available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sacn-folate-and-disease-prevention-report. Since then, there have been several further evidence reviews and modelling work (for example: https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/science-and-evidence/stochastic-modelling-to-estimate-the-potential-impact-of-fortification-of-flour-with-folic-acid-in-the-uk) to establish the level of folic acid to be added to flour, as well as to address concerns about potential adverse effects.\n\nThe policy has been subject to public consultations, including the 2019 Department of Health and Social Care and devolved governments consultation (available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/adding-folic-acid-to-flour/outcome/proposal-to-add-folic-acid-to-flour-consultation-response) on the proposal to fortify flour with folic acid (including a question on the effect on small businesses), and the 2022 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)-led consultation on the Bread and Flour Regulations. These consultations allowed members of the public, industry and health professionals to provide feedback and were a key part of policy development. Feedback to the Defra consultation highlighted consumer choice as a key concern. Limiting mandatory fortification to non-wholemeal wheat flour helps preserve choice by maintaining the availability of unfortified wholemeal and non-wheat flours. In addition, the policy does not apply to flour produced by small mills (definition based on their limited production capacity).\n\nThe NHS provides guidance for individuals who may need to avoid folic acid, for example, due to specific medical conditions or interactions with medication. People in this situation are advised to seek advice from a healthcare professional. Foods in the UK have been voluntarily fortified with folic acid for many years, including products such as breakfast cereals and spreads, without evidence of adverse health effects.\n\nThe UK Government and devolved governments are exploring how we will evaluate the impact of the policy.\n\nDepartment of Health & Social Care","created_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:00.287Z","updated_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:52.418Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764553,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764553.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Remove sentence reductions for guilty pleas in controlling and coercive cases","background":"I want the Government to introduce legislation so that defendants charged with controlling or coercive behaviour cannot receive a sentencing reduction for a guilty plea entered after initially pleading not guilty. This should be known as Paris’s Law.","additional_details":"Victims of coercive control often wait months or years for trial, reliving trauma while preparing evidence. Defendants may plead not guilty, then change to guilty at the last moment and still receive a reduced sentence. This can feel like continued abuse, prolonging distress and undermining justice. I believe late guilty pleas in these cases should not receive sentence reductions, as it prolongs suffering, including the suffering I have personally experienced","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":105971,"closing_date":"2026-10-21","created_at":"2026-03-17T07:09:07.101Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T11:25:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-21T08:18:36.628Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-17T07:44:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-27T11:43:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-11T12:23:00.347Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-18T17:43:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-07-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-10-19","debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Paris Shears","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-11","summary":"Guilty pleas given later in the process can still benefit victims and the administration of justice but are reflected by a substantially lower reduction in sentence.","details":"Controlling or coercive behaviour is a particularly insidious form of domestic abuse and we recognise the long-term emotional and psychological distress it can cause.  In our manifesto, we committed to ensuring policing have the right skills and training to respond appropriately to victims of VAWG. In February 2025, the Home Office announced £13.1 million funding to launch a new National Centre for VAWG and Public Protection (NCVPP) to act on this. The Centre will improve the response to violence against women and girls, creating a change in policing attitudes to ensure that officers respond effectively to VAWG crimes, including controlling or coercive behaviour, and offer victims consistent protection. \n\nAs of 3 February 2025, offenders convicted of controlling or coercive behaviour, and sentenced to 12 months or longer, are now automatically managed under Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA). MAPPA requires cooperative working between the police, probation, and prison services to manage the risks posed by the most serious offenders. This change recognises the significant harm this kind of offending can cause by putting controlling or coercive behaviour, on par with other forms of domestic abuse. \n\nWe also recognise that understanding of controlling or coercive behaviour has evolved significantly since the statutory guidance was published in 2023. As part of the recently published Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy, the government has committed to updating the controlling or coercive behaviour statutory guidance by the end of 2026. This will reflect the latest policy and practice, as well as new and emerging issues. \n\nIn relation to reductions in sentencing, it has long been the practice of the courts to give a reduction in sentence where a defendant pleads guilty. A guilty plea avoids the need for a trial (enabling cases to be dealt with quickly), shortens the gap between charge and sentence, and, in the case of an early plea, saves victims and witnesses from the concern about having to give evidence.\n\nThe Sentencing Guidelines set by the Sentencing Council provide a sliding scale of reductions depending on the point at which the plea is made. The maximum reduction for a plea at the first stage of proceedings is a third. The discount falls to a maximum of a tenth when the offender pleads on the first day of the trial. The reduction will normally be decreased further, even to zero, if the guilty plea is entered during the course of the trial.\n\nWe recognise that guilty pleas made earlier in the process can save victims and witnesses from the concern of having to give evidence, particularly in cases involving controlling or coercive behaviour. However, even if an offender pleads later in the process, this can still save victims from giving potentially highly traumatic evidence, but the later plea is reflected by a substantially lower reduction in the sentence. \n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2026-05-11T12:23:00.341Z","updated_at":"2026-05-11T12:23:40.112Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":773633,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/773633.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Launch a public inquiry into illegal migration in the UK","background":"We call on the Government to launch a full-scale public inquiry into illegal migration in the UK. The inquiry should investigate the effectiveness of UK border control, the financial cost on taxpayers, and the deportation system.","additional_details":"Thousands of people illegally migrate to the UK each year. We believe this has negatively impacted the UK to a significant extent and resulted in some people feeling unsafe walking the streets. Furthermore, we believe it has brought a great burden onto taxpayers as the Government has had to pay for more support for illegal migrants.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":82153,"closing_date":"2027-01-15","created_at":"2026-06-17T16:29:16.669Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:18:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-07-15T14:48:11.761Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-17T18:40:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-23T16:40:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-22T10:03:29.674Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Simon Worley","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-21","summary":"The Government is subject to ongoing scrutiny here through parliament, and by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration. The Government doesn’t consider a public inquiry necessary.","details":"The Government recognises the scale of the challenges inherited across the immigration and asylum system. Since taking office, the Government has publicly committed to reducing illegal migration and restoring public confidence in the immigration system and has put in place a wide-ranging programme of reform to restore order and control, including strengthened border security measures, increased enforcement activity, faster decision-making and higher levels of removals. Further changes are being developed and implemented through the Government’s wider immigration and asylum reform programme.\n\nThe Government is investing heavily in border security and international cooperation. Through the Border Security Command, law enforcement agencies are working alongside international partners to disrupt organised immigration crime, dismantle people-smuggling networks and strengthen enforcement activity across the migration route. In addition, the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/31) has provided law enforcement with stronger powers to tackle organised immigration crime and further protect the UK's borders.\n\nWe are also transforming the asylum system through the Restoring Order and Control policy statement, which can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-and-returns-policy-statement/restoring-order-and-control-a-statement-on-the-governments-asylum-and-returns-policy, and Immigration and Asylum Bill (https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/4254) which was introduced on 30 June 2026. These reforms will create a firmer and fairer system by simplifying decision-making, reducing legal challenges, increasing removals, and reducing the incentives that drive illegal migration. The Government is committed to ensuring that protection is available to those who genuinely need it, while making it harder for the system to be abused and easier to remove those with no right to remain in the UK. \n\nSince July 2024, we have arrested 1,900 criminals involved in organised immigration gangs, disrupted criminal smuggling activity at record levels, and with France, prevented more than 46,000 attempted Channel crossings. We have removed over 78,000 people (an increase of 52%) with no right to be here and delivered returns of small boat arrivals at record levels. We are continuing to exit asylum hotels, with fewer than 160 now remaining, reduced from 400 in use at the peak of 2023. Record numbers of asylum decisions have been made, and the introduction of a new 24-week target for deciding asylum and immigration appeals for those in accommodation and foreign national offenders will cut delays further from the current average wait of 67 weeks. Overall, asylum costs have fallen by £1 billion since the 2024 general election.\n\nThe Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration (ICIBI) is a government appointed official responsible for providing independent scrutiny of the UK's border and immigration functions. More information on current, and close, inspection reports can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/independent-chief-inspector-of-borders-and-immigration\n\nThe Government is regularly publicly scrutinised through several channels to monitor the effectiveness of its policies. The Home Affairs Committee is a cross-party committee of MPs responsible for scrutinising the work of the Home Office and its associated bodies. It examines government policy, spending and the law, in areas including immigration. You can find current inquiries, information on members, publication, and news here: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/83/home-affairs-committee/.\n\nThe Home Office recognises the public interest in illegal migration and, as such, regularly provides policy updates including consultation papers here: https://www.gov.uk/entering-staying-uk/refugees-asylum-human-rights#policy_and_engagement.\n\nFurthermore, the National Audit Office (NAO) is the UK’s independent public spending watchdog. They are responsible for supporting Parliament in holding the Government to account by providing high-quality audits. The Home Office is subject to such audits, and information on the work being undertaken can be obtained here: https://www.nao.org.uk/. Recent reports in 2025 include an analysis of the asylum system, and a report on the Home Office’s asylum accommodation contracts to support the Home Affairs Committee inquiry. \n\nTherefore, the Government is already subject to extensive public and parliamentary scrutiny to monitor the effectiveness of such policies and delivery. This, combined with the substantial package of work already underway and existing oversight mechanisms, the Government does not consider that a public inquiry is necessary to identify these challenges or determine how they should be addressed.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-09-22T10:03:29.659Z","updated_at":"2026-09-22T10:03:29.659Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":780269,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/780269.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the state pension age to 65 for all","background":"Reduce the state pension age to 65. We believe this could mean people can retire with dignity and avoid hardship. We also think it could free up jobs for younger workers entering the labour market.","additional_details":"Many aged 65–67 face poor health, caring pressures, and limited work options, which we think is unfair.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":72947,"closing_date":"2027-03-16","created_at":"2026-08-23T11:46:16.594Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-09-16T09:27:37.805Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-23T16:59:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-10-01T11:34:10.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Michelle Gill","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":779259,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/779259.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make statutory maternity pay 90% of wage for first 12 weeks & minimum wage after","background":"We believe mothers should never be forced back to work because maternity leave is unaffordable. UK SMP is among Europe’s least generous, falling to around 41% of minimum wage after 6 weeks. The Government should fix this and give mothers 12 weeks of Statutory Maternity Pay at 90% of their salary. ","additional_details":"It is estimated that between 2023-26, SMP rose by just 12.7%, whilst the National Living Wage rose by 22%. We are concerned the gap is widening. It was estimated that the proportion of mothers returning earlier to work for financial reasons rose from 42% in 2022 to 58% in 2023. \r\n  \r\nPublic research links maternity leave under 12 weeks to greater depression, poorer maternal wellbeing & lower sensitivity to a baby’s needs. Low SMP can hit low-income families hardest, forcing mothers back before they’re ready. We feel Statutory Maternity Leave for 12 weeks at 90% of salary, and the National Minimum Wage for the remainder, are the absolute minimum families deserve. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":66187,"closing_date":"2027-03-14","created_at":"2026-08-10T12:22:13.932Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-09-14T09:11:41.598Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-10T19:00:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-19T07:33:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-10-09T12:32:28.228Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Joeli Brearley","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-10-09","summary":"Maternity pay provides a measure of financial support to help mothers take time off work following birth. It is not intended to replace earnings. Pay is in scope of the Parental Leave and Pay Review.","details":"The Government recognises the importance of ensuring new parents have the time and support they need when welcoming a new child into their family. It understands that many families face financial pressures during the first year of a child’s life, and that the level of maternity pay is an important issue for many working parents.\n\nMaternity pay is intended to provide a measure of financial support while a mother takes time away from work to recover from childbirth and care for her child. It supports her during this time whilst maintaining her attachment to the labour market so that she can return to work when appropriate. Maternity pay is not intended to replace earnings in full.\n\nEligible women may receive either Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP) or Maternity Allowance (MA). SMP is paid by employers, while MA is paid by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to eligible women, including self-employed women and some employed women who do not qualify for SMP. Entitlement to both payments is based on a woman’s recent employment and earnings.\n\nBoth SMP and MA are paid for up to a maximum of 39 weeks. For SMP, the first six weeks are paid at a weekly rate equal to 90 per cent of the woman's average weekly earnings, with no upper limit, followed by up to 33 weeks at the lower of either the standard rate or 90 per cent of the woman's average weekly earnings. MA is paid at either the standard rate or 90 per cent of the woman’s average weekly earnings, whichever is the lower, for a maximum of 39 weeks.\n\nThe Government recognises the financial pressures facing many new parents and has measures in place to support them and their families. Maternity Pay is just one element of the support available. Depending on individual circumstances, additional financial support, for example, Universal Credit, Child Benefit, the Sure Start Maternity Grant (a lump sum payment of £500) and Healthy Start vouchers are also available to support new parents.  More information about benefits and financial support available to pregnant women and their families can be found on www.gov.uk via the Childcare and Parenting link on the home page.\n\nThe petition proposes that part of SMP should be paid at the national minimum wage, however it is important to note the distinction between a National Living Wage and maternity pay. The former is a minimum hourly rate for work, whereas maternity pay provides financial support during an absence from work. They serve different purposes and are not directly comparable. \n\nThe Government understands the importance of ensuring statutory payments are set at the right level. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is required by law to undertake an annual review of benefits and State Pensions, including statutory pay. This is based on a review of trends in prices and earnings growth in the preceding year. From April 2026 these payments were uprated in line with the Consumer Prices Index of 3.8 per cent, with their standard rates increasing from £187.18 to £194.32 per week. This means that the payments retain their value against inflation.\n\nHowever, Government knows there is more it can do to support working families. That is why it is undertaking a Review of the Parental Leave and Pay system, exploring how it can better support families, reflect the realities of modern work and childcare, and balance the needs of parents, employers and the Exchequer. The Review launched on 1 July 2025 and is due to conclude in early 2027. The Review is considering evidence on existing parental pay entitlements, including how any future reforms could best meet the needs of parents, employers and taxpayers. \n\nThe petition cites research linking maternity leave length and maternal health. Supporting mothers' health and wellbeing is a key objective of the Review. Government has engaged (and continues to engage) with maternity advocacy groups, who have shared their concerns about the level of maternity pay and the impact this can have on mothers’ health and wellbeing, and on family finances. \n\nThe Government is also committed to learning from international experience; however, cross-national comparisons must be made carefully given differences in labour markets and the wider package of support available to families.\n\nThe Review will conclude with a set of findings in which Government will outline next steps for taking any potential reforms forward to implementation. While the Review is considering whether changes may be needed in future, the current maternity pay system continues to provide support for eligible mothers during pregnancy and the first year following the birth of a child. \n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions","created_at":"2026-10-09T12:32:28.220Z","updated_at":"2026-10-09T12:32:28.220Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DWP","name":"Department for Work and Pensions","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":777710,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/777710.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make catapult attacks against animals a standalone criminal offence","background":"Introduce legislation in England to make it a specific, standalone criminal offence to intentionally or recklessly use, discharge or attempt to discharge a catapult or slingshot at or towards any animal.","additional_details":"Animals including swans, ducks, gulls, pigeons and squirrels have been deliberately targeted with catapults firing stones, ball bearings and other projectiles. Those struck can suffer broken bones, blindness, internal injuries and death.\r\n \r\nExisting protections are spread across different laws and may depend on the species and circumstances. We believe the law should be clear and consistent: catapults should never be used as weapons against animals.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":60415,"closing_date":"2027-02-20","created_at":"2026-07-20T20:56:52.894Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-08-20T14:23:12.880Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-21T08:48:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-24T20:29:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-14T08:28:04.696Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Robert Pownall","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-14","summary":"Intentionally causing harm to wildlife is unacceptable but sufficient laws are already in place to protect wild animals from the targeted use of catapults. ","details":"This government takes crimes against wildlife seriously and is aware of the ongoing and horrific misuse of catapults against wild animals, as well as domestic pets, other people and property.\n\nMost of the catapult attacks that have been reported to Defra appear to be against wild birds, often on or near to water. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects all wild birds and some wild animals in England and Wales. Within this legislation there are a range of offences making it illegal to deliberately attempt to kill, injure or inflict harm on wild birds such as the swans, ducks, gulls and pigeons listed in the petition. There are a range of other offences found in further legislation to protect wild animals from cruelty, such as the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 and the Animal Welfare Act 2006. \n\nSignificant sanctions are available to judges to hand down to those convicted of crimes under these Acts. Under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, a person may face a term of imprisonment of up to six months and/or an unlimited fine for killing or injuring a wild bird or protected wild mammal. Under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, to cause a ‘kept’ animal any unnecessary suffering can lead to stronger penalties - the maximum for this offence is five years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine. In fact, to many this represents a disparity between penalties for crimes against wildlife compared with similar offences against kept animals. This government is looking to address this and made a commitment in its 2025 Animal Welfare Strategy to review and look to strengthen penalties for cruelty against wildlife, so they are consistent with the higher levels of sentencing available for offences against pets and livestock. Defra would consider incidents involving catapults that cause unnecessary suffering to wild animals to potentially be in scope of any strengthened penalties. \n\nDefra does recognise that the misuse of catapults is causing great concern to some local communities. The department is working with the Home Office to find solutions and a way forward to protect our wildlife, the public and property from the appalling acts that are reported from across the country. It is also supportive of Operation Lakeshot - a multi-agency response chaired by the League Against Cruel Sports, which is aiming to reduce the level of crimes involving wildlife being killed or injured with powerful catapults. \n\nDefra will continue to keep relevant legislation under review but there are sufficient laws in place to protect wildlife from targeted use of catapults and existing powers are already available for the police to tackle their misuse. Defra therefore has no plans to make catapult attacks against animals a standalone criminal offence.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-09-14T08:28:04.692Z","updated_at":"2026-09-14T08:28:04.692Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":769616,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/769616.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Provide lifelong vet care and financial support for retired service animals","background":"We want the UK Government to create a national support scheme to provide lifelong veterinary care and financial assistance for retired service animals, including police dogs, military dogs, and police horses.","additional_details":"Service animals protect the public and support the emergency services and armed forces. Many retire with injuries or health conditions linked to their service. Ongoing care costs often fall to former handlers, adopters, or charities. \r\nWe want a national support scheme or pension to help fund lifelong veterinary care and welfare support for retired service animals.","committee_note":null,"state":"open","signature_count":55245,"closing_date":"2026-12-12","created_at":"2026-05-11T16:52:32.448Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T11:42:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-12T09:43:26.177Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-11T19:30:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-16T08:51:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-07-27T15:20:37.656Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Kat Darcy","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-27","summary":"Whilst the government has no plans for a national support scheme for retired service animals, government is reviewing options to improve vet fee transparency and consumer choice.","details":"The government understands the strength of feeling on the welfare of service animals and recognises and greatly values the incredible and vital work service animals carry out alongside our police and military. The government believes these service animals, who often face risks to their own safety and wellbeing, should be able to have a comfortable and healthy retirement. Police forces are responsible for the welfare of their service animals throughout their service and into retirement. Their retirement can be a combination of local arrangements, such as charitable organisations and volunteers, the exact nature being a local decision for the force.\n\nThese animals can play a valuable role in protecting the public, supporting emergency services and assisting the Armed Forces, and it is right that their welfare should be taken seriously throughout their working lives and into retirement.\n\nThe UK government does not currently have any plans to introduce financial support or a national support scheme to cover veterinary fees for animals, including retired service animals. Arrangements for the care and rehoming of service animals vary depending on the organisation responsible for them, the role they have performed and the circumstances of retirement. Currently, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) does not cover ongoing fees for service animals following their retirement.  With regard to the police, this would come down to the individual police services and how they choose to spend their money – the government would not be able to dictate their funding. The MOD keeps its retirement arrangements under regular review to ensure they continue to deliver the best outcomes for the animals concerned.\n\nThe government currently has no plans to change the retirement process for police service animals, including the funding of veterinary care. All operational decisions on the retirement of service animals are made on a force-by-force basis under the responsibility of the Chief Constable.\n\nWe are, however, aware of the issue of rising costs for veterinary services and are actively reviewing options to improve price transparency and knowledge of options available for pet owners, including those who take on responsibility for retired service animals. \n\nBetween January and March 2026, Defra consulted on reform of the Veterinary Surgeons Act 1966 (VSA). This was developed in response to calls from the veterinary sector, stakeholders and the public highlighting the need for improvements to the regulatory framework. On 9 July 2026, Defra published a paper (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/our-vision-for-a-thriving-veterinary-sector) responding to the consultation and detailing government’s vision for a thriving veterinary sector through reform of the VSA.\n\nThe paper also sets out the government’s response to the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA’s) market investigation into veterinary services for household pets, which has identified £1 billion overspend on vet fees over five years and lack of price transparency across the sector.(https://www.gov.uk/cma-cases/veterinary-services-market-for-pets-review)\n\nDefra accepts the CMA’s recommendations for what should be included in a new VSA as well as supporting the CMA’s proposed remedies. The response confirms Defra’s support for the CMA’s orders alongside the update of the VSA which will enable government to enact those outcomes of the CMA’s market investigation that require legislative change.\n\nAs part of wider VSA reform, the government proposes to introduce mandatory regulation of veterinary and animal healthcare businesses. This would strengthen the regulatory framework by enabling consumer protection and competition duties to be placed on the regulator, helping to ensure that businesses operate in ways that support transparency, fairness and informed choice. It would also provide more options for complaints and redress where pet owners have concerns about the service they have received.\n\nThe government will continue to consider the evidence from this work and any relevant recommendations as it develops its approach to veterinary sector reform.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-07-27T15:20:37.654Z","updated_at":"2026-07-27T15:21:30.598Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":763721,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/763721.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ensure new sewage treatment infrastructure meets higher standards as in the EU","background":"We urge the government to review the regulations for new sewage treatment infrastructure and introduce new legislation to ensure high international standards are met; to safeguard people’s health, better protect all water bodies and reduce damaging long term impacts.","additional_details":"All new wastewater infrastructure must be built to well-established, higher international standards, in line with the revised EU Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) standards in force since 1 January 2025, to significantly reduce the pollution load on water bodies. Proposed new schemes built to outdated standards must be stopped as they will continue releasing biological and chemical contaminants, including forever chemicals, harming water bodies, wildlife, and public health. They also risk a dramatic increase in customer water bills to pay for expensive and avoidable upgrades.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":48451,"closing_date":"2026-11-01","created_at":"2026-03-09T10:16:27.934Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T11:59:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-01T08:09:30.628Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-09T10:58:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-27T12:09:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-08-04T14:25:29.128Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Ian Theodore McNuff","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-08-04","summary":"The government is developing a package of reforms to improve drainage and wastewater systems efficiently, fairly and affordably, including to the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations.","details":"The government is considering a range of reforms to fix our broken water system. Delivering better outcomes and a more sustainable approach to drainage and wastewater management is a key consideration.   \n\nWe want to better address the root causes of pollution head on. We will ensure legislation, funding streams and regulatory mechanisms support the delivery of better outcomes and shift the focus towards ‘pre-pipe’ solutions, such as rainwater management and tackling sewer misuse. These changes are more sustainable, deliver wider benefits like reducing flood risk and increasing biodiversity, and will deliver better value for money for customers.    \n\nIn England, we are already taking ambitious steps to strengthen environmental and performance standards in the water sector and our recent Water (Special Measures) Act will deliver on the government’s commitment to put water companies under special measures to clean up our water.     \n\nThrough that Act, we will drive meaningful improvements in the performance and culture of the water industry. We will strengthen the power of our regulators, increase transparency around pollution incidents and expand the cost recovery powers of regulators.    \n\nBuilding on record investment to improve storm overflows and wastewater treatment, the government is developing a package of reforms to revolutionise the water industry, delivering a systematic approach to improving drainage and wastewater systems.   \n\nWe are also taking forward a programme of reforms to ensure that the water system better delivers outcomes for customers in a way that is efficient, fair and affordable. The Independent Water Commission’s final report in July 2025 recommended that government review the legislative landscape, including the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (UWWTR). The report’s recommendations are the basis for the ongoing development of new legislation, and this government intends to bring forward a water reform bill early this parliament to reform the water sector and ensure it delivers for customers and the environment.    \n\nThe government provided further detail in the Water Reform White Paper, published in January 2026, in which we set out that through an upcoming water bill we will progress an ambitious, coherent reset of the legislative framework. This includes elements of the UWWTR and exploring updates to the Water Framework Directive Regulations, where needed.   \n\nA central objective is to secure lasting improvements in service for customers while minimising impacts on customer bills and ensuring strong value for money. This includes strengthening support for vulnerable households through reforms. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-08-04T14:25:29.125Z","updated_at":"2026-08-04T14:25:29.125Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":781598,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/781598.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban children & their likeness being used to promote pornography or adult-content","background":"We want the Government to introduce legislation making it illegal to use children or their likeness in advertising, promotional material or social-media content to promote commercial pornography or adult-content businesses, including where the material featuring the child is not sexually explicit.","additional_details":"We believe there is a safeguarding gap where children, or dolls intended to represent children, can appear in otherwise non-explicit social-media content used to promote commercial adult-content businesses. Children cannot consent to such associations. We want clear legal boundaries preventing the use of children, or representations of children, to advertise or generate engagement for commercial pornography or adult content.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":40602,"closing_date":"2027-04-07","created_at":"2026-09-11T09:04:49.934Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-10-07T12:49:16.754Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-11T09:33:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-10-07T18:45:30.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Sarah Linaker","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":769319,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/769319.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund £20,000 a year (term time) wage for Teaching Assistants","background":"Up Teaching Assistants' pay to a minimum of £20,000 a year (term time) to reflect the amount of work they do. It's not just displays and marking. It's challenging behaviour, teaching, marking, first aid, displays, emotional coaching and supporting children with SEN.","additional_details":"We believe that Teaching Assistants' job roles have changed massively over the years. It used to be that we were in to do photocopying, displays and some marking. We feel that now, many TAs must deal with a lot of children with SEN on a daily basis, without reflective pay for that. We mark, we teach, we problem solve, we deal with sick children, we work with small groups of children, we do multiple interventions, we read daily, we coach children on how to manage emotions.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":39794,"closing_date":"2026-12-08","created_at":"2026-05-08T16:12:17.970Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T09:45:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-08T12:19:58.475Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-08T17:09:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-13T20:18:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-07-27T14:16:13.831Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Bethany Young","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-27","summary":"The Government is establishing the School Support Staff Negotiating Body to negotiate minimum standards for pay and conditions for our vital school support staff, including Teaching Assistants.  ","details":"Teaching Assistants (TAs) play an important role in supporting children to achieve and thrive in schools.\n\nThat is why the Government is establishing the School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB). Establishing the SSSNB was a manifesto commitment and is an important part of delivering both the government’s Plan to Make Work Pay and Opportunity Mission. \n\nThe Employment Rights Act 2025 provides for the establishment of the SSSNB. The SSSNB will be a new statutory body specifically for school support staff. Its purpose is to bring employers and employee representatives together to negotiate minimum standards for pay and conditions for school support staff, including TAs, in all state-funded schools in England. It will also advise on training and career progression for school support staff.\n\nWhere new minimums are set, those currently below them will see their terms improved, while those already on more favourable terms will retain them. No member of support staff will therefore see a reduction in pay, terms or conditions as a result of these reforms. At the same time, employers will retain the flexibility to offer more than the statutory minimum, enabling them to respond to local needs and labour market conditions. The introduction of national minimum pay and conditions through the SSSNB represents a significant step forward, creating a baseline of consistency and protection across the workforce for the first time.\n\nSecondary legislation will be required to commence and constitute the Body, and the SSSNB is expected to be established in autumn 2026.\n\nSchool support staff will continue under their existing arrangements for the 2026-27 financial year. The first improvements to support staff contracts resulting from SSSNB negotiations are expected to come into effect from the 2027-28 financial year at the earliest.\n\nA dedicated webpage for the SSSNB can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/school-support-staff-negotiating-body-sssnb \n\nWe are providing schools with £700 million in additional funding in financial year 2026-27 to support them with both the costs of the schools teacher pay award and the local government services pay offer in respect of support staff in 2026-27.\n\nWe are also investing £200 million in a new SEND training offer to upskill staff in every school, college and nursery - this will include training for teaching assistants and support them to feel confident supporting pupils with SEND. We will continue to work in collaboration with the sector over the coming months to design and develop an offer that works for staff and schools.\n\nThis Government values and recognises the vital contributions of TAs in supporting teaching and pupils.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-07-27T14:16:13.829Z","updated_at":"2026-07-27T14:16:13.829Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":776949,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776949.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce urgent moratorium on AI Data Centres and BESS outside AI Growth Zones","background":"Introduce: (1) an immediate moratorium on planning approvals for BESS (Battery Energy Storage Systems) and Data Centres outside designated AI Growth Zones; (2) mandatory Rural Impact Assessments conducted at local level; and (3) mandatory comprehensive investigation into financing of all proposals.","additional_details":"We believe robust evaluation is needed as to: (i) the cost-benefit analysis of each BESS/Data Centre; and (ii) all financing, including non-UK-based funds. Proposals outside AI Growth Zones can be highly problematic, because they may seek to evade regulation and Government scrutiny. Rural areas are especially vulnerable. There are reports of farmers being threatened with compulsory purchase. Loss of farmland could endanger UK food security. Irreparable harm may be caused to heritage, landscapes, ecology, public health and wellbeing.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":39556,"closing_date":"2027-02-17","created_at":"2026-07-13T16:08:22.844Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:20:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-08-17T15:35:51.602Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-13T17:06:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-24T17:48:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-17T08:52:15.835Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Cheryl Cottle-Hunkin","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-10-06","summary":"We have no plans to pause data centre or BESS approvals. Projects will continue to be assessed under robust local and national planning rules.","details":"The government has no plans to introduce a moratorium on planning approvals for data centres or BESS projects or introduce mandatory Rural Impact Assessments or mandatory comprehensive investigation into financing of all proposals.\n\nGrid-scale batteries are essential for delivering a decarbonised power sector by 2030 and net zero by 2050. They balance the electricity system at lower cost, maximise the use of renewable generation such as wind and solar, reduce the need for new generation and network upgrades, and provide rapid-response services to maintain system frequency and security of supply from milliseconds to several hours. The Government's Clean Power Plan aims to increase grid-scale battery storage capacity from 8.1GW today to 23-27GW by 2030 in the UK. \n\nData centres are a critical part of the UK’s digital infrastructure. They underpin everyday services and provide the computing capacity needed for scientific research, advancing innovation, and economic growth. The government has designated data centres as Critical National Infrastructure, reflecting their importance to the UK’s economy and security.\n\nThe government recognises that data centre developments and battery facilities can raise concerns for local communities, including in relation to land use and environmental impacts. Data centre proposals inside and outside AI Growth Zones, as well as BESS, remain subject to the same planning scrutiny and regulatory requirements as all other developments. As part of the planning process, decision-makers are required to consider a wide range of relevant factors, including impacts on the environment, heritage assets, landscapes, ecology and local communities.\n\nIn most cases, planning applications are determined by local planning authorities under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The National Planning Policy Framework (2026) requires planning policies and decisions to take into account the quality of agricultural land, including land classified as best and most versatile, and where significant development of such land is necessary, to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to higher quality land. \n\nFor particularly large data infrastructure projects, developers may choose to seek consent through the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP) regime, where the relevant Secretary of State decides on granting development consent, rather than local authorities acting as decisionmaker. The criteria for direction into the NSIP regime and approval to grant development consent will be outlined in the National Policy Statement (NPS) for data centres, which is due to be published shortly. The NPS suggests an indicative threshold for capacity for new projects to be directed into NSIP, and criteria for development consent to be granted including issues such as grid connection, water usage, environmental impacts, and local benefits. Development consent may be refused where significant adverse impacts cannot be appropriately managed or mitigated. The government seeks to support sustainable growth while ensuring impacts on communities and the environment are properly considered.\n\nThe government welcomes investment that supports economic growth, innovation and technological development in the UK for both data infrastructure and battery facilities. Alongside this, safeguarding the security and resilience of critical infrastructure remains a key priority. The National Security and Investment Act 2021 provides powers to scrutinise and, where necessary, intervene in acquisitions in Data Centres and BESS that may pose risks to national security.\n\nDepartment for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade\n\nThis is a corrected response. The Government requested to update the response to rectify inaccuracies in the original response, to which the Petitions Committee agreed.\n\nYou can find the original response, with details of the inaccuracies in it, towards the bottom of the petition page. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776949)","created_at":"2026-09-17T08:52:15.820Z","updated_at":"2026-10-06T17:01:54.769Z"},"debate":null,"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":764063,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764063.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review the 2026 visa brake: Publish evidence & create transitional arrangements","background":"Publish evidence & methodology for the 2026 visa brake, review the country and route list, and create transitional arrangements for applicants with confirmed university offers, scholarships, sponsored specialist roles, and women facing severe restrictions on education or work in their home countries","additional_details":"The visa brake can refuse overseas Student and Skilled Worker applications by nationality. The Government should publish the evidence, thresholds and comparative data used, explain in more detail why some countries and routes were included while others were not, and protect genuine applicants, including women facing severe restrictions on education or work in their home countries. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":38199,"closing_date":"2026-10-13","created_at":"2026-03-12T01:12:34.959Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T11:25:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-13T08:49:41.284Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-12T01:50:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-08T05:48:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-08-18T10:02:33.217Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Yama Farooq Mujadidi","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-08-18","summary":"The Government has published the evidence and methodology for the 2026 visa brake, implemented transitional arrangements and committed to reviewing the policy. No further action is required.","details":"The Government does not consider further changes to the 2026 visa brake necessary. Evidence and methodology have been published and transitional arrangements of 21 days were implemented. The brake is not intended to be permanent, and will be kept under regular review, however it will only be released once the Government considers it appropriate to do so. The Government has also committed to three new safe and legal routes to offer sanctuary to those genuinely fleeing war and persecution. This includes refugee study and work routes, including for women facing hardship in their home countries.\n\nDetails of the evidence, thresholds and method used for the visa brake are detailed in full in the Impact Assessment published alongside the announcement of the visa brakes in March 2026. This can be found online at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/69a9a3301f59a04b996e77f3/HO1030_Visa_Brake_Impact_Assessment.pdf.\n\nOnce a nationality reaches the threshold outlined in the Impact Assessment, this triggers a broader assessment to inform a final decision on whether to impose a visa brake. This includes not just visa-linked asylum rates, but also wider equities, such as migration considerations, national security, and growth. This assessment is conducted by the Home Office alongside other government departments. Where other nationalities also meet this threshold, full assessments will be carried out, before a final decision is made to impose a visa brake. \n\nThe visa brake is not intended to be permanent but will only be lifted when the Government considers it appropriate to do so. The brake will only be lifted once it is clear there has been a reduction in the risk of high proportions of visa-linked asylum claims recommencing on that route from that nationality. This principally uses the broader cross-government assessment to inform the final decision to reassess if the risk remains or if the brake can be removed. \n\nTransitional arrangements were implemented before the visa brake took effect. In order to allow prospective students with an offer from a licensed sponsor and a valid Confirmation of Acceptance of Studies (CAS) to apply for visas, we provided 21 days’ notice ahead of the visa brake coming into force on 26 March. The brake does not apply to applications from the affected routes and nationalities submitted before 26 March, nor to those who already hold a valid Student visa. \n\nThere are no plans for any exceptions to the brake, including individuals in receipt of scholarships such as Chevening and Commonwealth Scholars. We recognise the acute challenges faced by particular cohorts, including women and girls facing severe restrictions in their home countries, and these were carefully considered during policy development. While the restrictions they face are severe, introducing an exception for this cohort would be unfair on those other nationals who do not share the same protected characteristic.\n\nOn 26 June the Home Secretary confirmed the refugee study and named sponsorship routes will open to applications from prospective lead sponsors in the autumn, with arrivals expected from autumn 2027 onwards. Design work is underway to develop these routes, and we are working closely with a range of stakeholders to ensure the routes work for beneficiaries, stakeholders and government. The refugee work route is expected to open next year, enabling employers to sponsor refugees. UNHCR-recognised refugees will be eligible for the new safe and legal routes, and no nationalities will be prevented from eligibility. Further details will be set out in due course.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-08-18T10:02:33.214Z","updated_at":"2026-08-18T10:02:33.214Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":771401,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/771401.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Permanent driving ban on intoxicated drivers guilty of causing death","background":"I urge Parliament to take decisive action by implementing a lifetime driving ban on those guilty of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and killing innocent people while under influence. Other countries have set precedents by enforcing stringent penalties.","additional_details":"We feel the current legal framework fails to deter repeat offenders and adequately protect innocent people. endangering more lives and communities.\r\n \r\nWe believe implementing a lifetime driving ban is about ensuring public safety, deterring repeat offenses, and sending a powerful message that our society refuses to tolerate such negligence. For the families affected, this legal change could offer a measure of justice and a chance to prevent others from enduring a similar tragedy.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":35113,"closing_date":"2027-01-06","created_at":"2026-06-01T21:45:40.778Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:25:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-07-06T08:15:08.621Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-02T11:47:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-23T21:09:10.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Tracy Elizabeth venison","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":777325,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/777325.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund second stem cell transplants on NHS for relapse within 12 months","background":"We want the UK Government to provide funding to the NHS so that patients with blood cancer who relapse within one year from their first transplant, and whose clinical team feel they would benefit from a second transplant, are not denied a potentially lifesaving transplant.","additional_details":"For some people whose blood cancer returns after a stem cell transplant, a second transplant can be lifesaving. NHS England’s policy states patients are not eligible for a second stem cell transplant if the cancer returns within 12 months of their first transplant. Anthony Nolan, DKMS and Leukaemia UK are calling on the UK Government to fund and enable NHS England to change its policy, so that no patient is denied a potentially lifesaving stem cell transplant just because they can’t afford it.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":32088,"closing_date":"2027-02-12","created_at":"2026-07-16T16:31:12.907Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-08-12T12:13:10.655Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-16T18:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-10T11:55:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-28T08:32:01.780Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Faith Hinitt","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-25","summary":"NHS policy should be guided by the latest clinical evidence. An independent evidence review into the case for a second stem cell transplant if there is a relapse within 12 months is underway.","details":"The Government recognises the concerns raised by patients, families and charities regarding access to a second allogeneic stem cell transplant for people whose disease relapses within 12 months of a first transplant.\n\nNHS England commissions specialised treatments in line with evidence-based clinical commissioning policies. Under the current commissioning policy (https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/clin-comms-policy-16068p.pdf) a second transplant is routinely funded where relapse occurs more than 12 months after the initial transplant. Patients whose disease relapses within 12 months are not currently eligible under the existing policy.\n\nNHS policy should be guided by the latest clinical evidence, which is why an independent evidence review into the case for a second allogeneic stem cell transplant has already been commissioned.\n\nThe ongoing review will consider the latest peer-reviewed clinical evidence, alongside clinical benefit, patient safety, affordability and the opportunity cost of any new investment. Any changes to commissioning arrangements will be considered through NHS England's established policy development process (https://www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/nhs-england-specialised-commissioning-service-development-policy/), which includes an independent evidence review, expert clinical input, patient and public involvement, and stakeholder testing. Stakeholders will have the opportunity to comment on the draft policy through a formal stakeholder testing process (anticipated for early 2027) before any final decisions are made. \n\nDetails of the current policy and how to stay up to date with the review are available on the NHS England website (https://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/spec-services/npc-crg/blood-and-infection-group-f/blood-and-marrow-transplantation/).\n\nWhile the independent evidence review is under way, any patients who have concerns or questions about their treatment options should speak to their local clinical team for support.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-09-28T08:32:01.777Z","updated_at":"2026-09-28T08:32:35.205Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":776833,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/776833.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require public bodies to achieve unqualified audit opinion before raising taxes","background":"Require public bodies whose accounts cannot be certified with an unqualified opinion by auditors to be banned from increasing taxes or receiving a larger budget the following year. ","additional_details":"If this happens for two consecutive years, all elected representatives for that authority should be unable to stand for re-election.\r\n\r\nThe UK Government's accounts have not been certified with an unqualified opinion by auditors for three consecutive years. The DWP, HMRC and Ministry of Defence have repeatedly failed to achieve entirely unqualified audits, while hundreds of councils each year cannot get their accounts signed off. The National Audit Office estimates up to £81 billion is lost annually to fraud and error. Yet politicians continue raising our taxes while claiming they need more money. We believe it's time to restore financial accountability.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":30693,"closing_date":"2027-02-12","created_at":"2026-07-12T13:10:17.651Z","updated_at":"2026-10-10T21:39:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-08-12T08:52:25.238Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-12T13:38:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-14T14:55:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-03T10:13:08.728Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Lee Nallalingham","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-03","summary":"The Government is committed to strong financial management and transparency but does not believe it is appropriate for decisions on taxation or public spending to be subject to an unqualified audit.","details":"The authority to set rates of taxation ultimately rests with Parliament, which scrutinises and approves the Finance Bill introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Similarly, departmental budgets are set through the established Spending Review process and formally approved by Parliament each year through Supply and Appropriation Bills introduced by Treasury minsters. This allows funding decisions to be considered in the round, taking account of the Government's priorities, public service needs, and the wider fiscal position.\n\nThe Government recognises that strong financial management and transparency are vital to maintaining confidence in how public money is spent. The National Audit Office supports Parliament in holding government to account by auditing central government accounts and reporting on whether public money has been used efficiently, effectively, and economically.\n\nWhile audit opinions provide important information, a qualified audit opinion can arise for a variety of reasons, and does not mean that public services are not being delivered effectively. Across government, departments work closely with auditors to address issues that have led to qualifications.\n\nThe Government also recognises the importance of high-quality local services and believes in empowering local decision-makers, including by ensuring that local authorities have the flexibility to generate their own income through council tax. It is for local authorities to balance the need for additional revenue from increases in council tax against the additional burden on their residents.\n\nThe Government has taken action to clear the backlog of audits for local authorities, and is reforming the local audit system, including through the establishment of the Local Audit Office to provide stronger oversight and a more streamlined framework for local authority audits. Local audit opinions can be affected by a range of factors and must be considered in their specific context.\n\nThe Government remains committed to transparency and accountability across the public sector, while ensuring that decisions on taxation and public spending are taken through the appropriate democratic and statutory processes.\n\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2026-09-03T10:13:08.714Z","updated_at":"2026-09-03T10:13:08.714Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":778453,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/778453.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require asylum seekers & foreign criminals to be detained on remote UK islands","background":"Require the offshore detention of asylum seekers and criminals who are foreign nationals on remote UK islands away from the general population whilst providing them with humanitarian aid and shelter. This could keep the UK population safe and reduce the taxpayer burden.","additional_details":"We believe asylum seekers should be housed on remote UK islands whilst their claims are processed and receive basic humanitarian support rather than being placed in local communities at the taxpayers’ expense. \r\n \r\nWe believe the Government’s first duty is to protect British citizens and secure the borders. If the ECHR prevents deportations, they should remain there until they can be returned.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":30460,"closing_date":"2027-03-03","created_at":"2026-07-29T12:35:13.998Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-09-03T14:09:15.710Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-29T17:22:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-09-04T16:22:40.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Darren Chandler","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":775103,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/775103.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Minimum State Pension should equal the National Minimum Wage for under 18s.","background":"The National Living Wage age for 21+ is now £23,132 (35 hour week; 52 week year). Even the National Minimum Wage for under 18's is £14,560 (same basis). My full New State Pension is only £12,564 after working for a lifetime.","additional_details":"I believe for 65+ a minimum UK standard of living is £14,500 and the State Pension should match this.\r\n\r\nThe full New State Pension lags well behind those in Europe (UK only 13th of 28). Even an apprentice, or under 18 worker, is now legislated to earn a salary of at least £14,560. For 18 to 20 year old workers this National Minimum Wage equates to £19,747 per annum. For those who have worked and paid NI and taxes all their lives, we believe a full State Pension of £12,564 is just not fair and equitable and the State Pension should be at least the £14,500 necessary for a minimum standard of living for retirees.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":28633,"closing_date":"2027-01-28","created_at":"2026-06-25T18:44:48.383Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T10:03:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-07-28T09:49:24.859Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-27T20:05:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-27T16:46:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-11T12:08:10.989Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Richard Sobey MBE","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-11","summary":"The Government has no plans to make the State Pension equal the National Minimum Wage for under 18s. ","details":"The Government is committed to supporting current and future generations of pensioners and giving them the dignity and security they deserve in retirement.\n\nIn 2026/27 the Government will spend over £186 billion directly on the State Pension and benefits for pensioners in Great Britain. The full rate of the new State Pension has risen to £241.30 per week, which is over £12,500 per year, following an increase in line with average earnings. \n\nThe basic State Pension has also increased to £184.90 per week, which is over £9,600 per year. These increases reflect our commitment to the Triple Lock throughout this parliament - uprating the State Pension by the highest of inflation measured by the Consumer Price Index, average wage increase or 2.5% each year - and to protecting pensioners from the rising cost of living. Maintaining the Triple Lock throughout this Parliament will mean the annual spending on people’s State Pensions is forecast to rise by over £30 billion, this will see pensioners’ yearly incomes being up to £2,100 higher.\n\nThe State Pension and the National Minimum Wage have different purposes, and a direct comparison cannot be drawn. The National Minimum Wage is designed to protect young and low-income workers and provide an incentive to work.\n\nIt is also difficult to make meaningful comparisons between State Pension schemes in different countries because there are important differences in the way they are run. There are many factors to take into account such as different tax systems, the cost of living, access to occupational pensions and availability of other social security benefits, as well as the provision of services and goods free to pensioners or at concessionary rates.\n\nOur system of state, private, and workplace pensions provides the basis for security in retirement. The new State Pension was introduced in 2016 to provide a simpler, clearer, sustainable foundation for private saving, including workplace pensions supported through Automatic Enrolment. \n\nThe Government takes seriously the need to ensure pensioners – including future retirees – have a decent standard of living. That is why the Government has recently launched the Pensions Commission to ensure our pensions system delivers this in the decades ahead.\n\nIn addition to the State Pension, the government makes available supplementary benefits, including Pension Credit (which guarantees a minimum level of income for low-income pensioners), to provide additional support in later life. Pension Credit passports pensioners to receive other benefits (help with council tax, fuel bills and a free TV licence for those over 75).\n\nThe vast majority of pensioners – around 9 million individuals – will benefit from a Winter Fuel Payment this winter. The Government has been clear that the Winter Fuel Payment should be means-tested on the basis of income. For higher income pensioners, those with an annual income of more than £35,000, the payment will be recovered via the tax system. This threshold means no lower or middle-income pensioners will miss out, with the vast majority of pensioners – over three quarters – in England and Wales benefitting. Those on Pension Credit and certain other income-related benefits will benefit from Winter Fuel Payments regardless of their income.  \n\nOther key supplementary benefits for low-income pensioners include the Warm Home Discount (rebate on energy bills) and Housing Benefit (help with rent). Additional discretionary support may be available through local authorities under the Crisis and Resilience Fund (CRF), for pensioners who are in crisis and in need for immediate financial support.  All pensioners qualify for free eye tests and NHS prescriptions, and free bus passes.\n\nPensioners with a long-term health condition or disability may also be eligible for additional-costs disability benefits. In England and Wales these are Attendance Allowance, Disability Living Allowance and Personal Independence Payment. In Scotland, where this is a devolved matter, they are the Scottish Government’s Pension Age Disability Payment, Adult Disability Payment and, from March 2025, Scottish Adult Disability Living Allowance. All these reserved and devolved benefits also give rise to a disability addition in Pension Credit. Entitlement to Carer’s Allowance, or to the Scottish Government’s Carer Support Payment, gives rise to a carer addition in Pension Credit.\n\nThe Government’s other priority to support pensioners is to rescue the NHS. We inherited a situation where 1 in 5 over 75s were on an NHS waiting list. That is totally unacceptable, and we are tackling it with both reform and resources. We are investing a further £29 billion a year into the NHS by 2028/29, and as a result NHS waiting lists, and the number of over 65s on them, are falling. \n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions","created_at":"2026-09-11T12:08:10.982Z","updated_at":"2026-09-11T12:08:10.982Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DWP","name":"Department for Work and Pensions","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":770527,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/770527.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Disapprove the draft Equality Act 2010 guidance laid on 21 May 2026","background":"I want the House of Commons to disapprove the Equality Act 2010: Draft Code of Practice for services, public functions and associations, 2026 laid on 21 May 2026.","additional_details":"We are concerned that the guidance published on 21 May 2016 could lead to women being excluded from women's spaces based on their appearance. We think that the guidance will make it harder for trans people to participate in sport as either gender, and that it can limit trans people from accessing toilets and other facilities that match their acquired gender. I therefore think the House of Commons should disapprove this draft guidance.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":27645,"closing_date":"2026-12-19","created_at":"2026-05-22T06:04:46.142Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T08:11:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-19T14:37:04.922Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-22T10:11:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-24T08:30:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-08-18T16:40:09.072Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Rebecca Bennett","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-08-18","summary":"Disapproving the Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations would leave duty bearers having to comply with the Equality Act 2010 without updated guidance on how to do so. ","details":"The Equality and Human Rights Commission (“EHRC”) has developed a revised Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations (“the Code”). This Code provides guidance for duty bearers on how to comply with the 2010 Act. If a service provider is still unsure, they should seek legal advice.\nThe Code covers discrimination, harassment and victimisation in services, public functions and associations across all protected characteristics. \n\nThe Code was laid before Parliament on 21st May, to allow for a period of Parliamentary scrutiny. That period ended on 9th July, as laid out in the Equality Act 2006. As Parliament did not disapprove the draft Code, the new Code was brought in through the process required by the Equality Act 2006 from 5 August.\n\nWith regards to women being excluded from spaces based on appearance; the Code explains that it’s not always possible to be sure of someone's sex based on their appearance. Whether it is necessary and proportionate for providers to ask someone about their sex will depend on the specific circumstances. \nAs for trans people accessing toilets and facilities, the Code is clear that trans people should not be left without access to services or facilities. Whilst the Code indicates that toilets designated as male or female should be for those of that sex, for trans people who don’t feel comfortable using toilets in line with their sex, providers may have other facilities open to them, such as accessible toilets or self-contained lockable toilets - which anyone can use. In places, like cafes, where there are just one or two toilets for both men and women, anyone can use them. The Code is clear that there should be toilet provision for everyone.\n\nWith regards to sport, everyone should be able to enjoy the physical and mental health benefits of sport, and to participate in a way that ensures they feel safe. The Code allows for restrictions in sports in \"gender-affected activities\". Gender-affected activities apply to any sport where the physical strength, stamina, or physique of an average person of one sex would put them at a disadvantage against the other. Organisers should consider if there are other ways to include trans people, such as \"Open\" or \"Mixed-Sex\" categories, rather than total exclusion from the sport entirely.\nBeyond the Code, this Government wants to ensure that all LGBT+ people are safe, included, and protected from discrimination. We have published a draft bill to ban conversion practices, offering protection from these abusive practices. The NHS has commissioned its first ever review to tackle health inequalities experienced by LGBT+ people led by Dr Michael Brady, including access to mental health care, cancer screening and primary care services. The review will be published later this year. Additionally, we have recently enacted stronger legislation to tackle hate crimes based on transgender identity, sexual orientation, and sex, making all existing strands of hate crime an aggravated offence. \n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2026-08-18T16:40:09.070Z","updated_at":"2026-08-18T16:40:09.070Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":779519,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/779519.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the retirement age for the NHS pension scheme to 60","background":"Reduce the retirement age for NHS staff pension scheme to 60. We are concerned NHS staff are facing extreme physical and mental burnout daily. High stress and long shifts can risk employee health and patient safety.","additional_details":"We want the Government to lower the age NHS staff can draw their full pension to protect staff and patients. NHS roles can be physically exhausting and mentally draining. Long shifts, heavy workloads, and intense stress can cause severe burnout. We believe having staff work until 65+ is dangerous, risks employee health and compromises patient safety.\r\n \r\nLowering the retirement age could prevent workforce exhaustion, attract younger professionals into the service, prevent staff turnover & support frontline workers.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":25194,"closing_date":"2027-03-17","created_at":"2026-08-13T09:04:39.266Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:28:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-09-17T11:26:33.019Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-13T12:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-10-07T16:59:40.000Z","government_response_at":null,"debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Kirsty uttley","rejection":null,"government_response":null,"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":777752,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/777752.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop plans to use MoD sites for asylum seekers without full local consultation","background":"Calling on the new Prime Minster and his Government to immediately withdraw plans to use MoD sites for asylum seeker accommodation without full, open and transparent consultation with the local communities and local representatives whose lives will be impacted most.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":24192,"closing_date":"2027-02-19","created_at":"2026-07-21T12:41:48.941Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T12:26:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-08-19T09:28:02.652Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-07-21T15:21:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-22T18:46:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-09-09T09:21:46.011Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Clare Brown","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-09-09","summary":"Large sites play an important role in ending asylum hotel use, reducing impact on communities, and will continue to be progressed in consultation with local authorities and statutory partners. ","details":"On 29 June, the Home Office announced plans to extend Crowborough, expand capacity and use at Wethersfield, and progress three further MOD sites for asylum accommodation. We agree with the public that all asylum hotels need to close. However, the Home Office must ensure that we have enough secure, safe and sustainable accommodation so that we can continue to meet our obligation in a fair and equitable manner. \n\nThat is a complex process that must be delivered in a controlled, managed and orderly way. We want to go further and faster, which is why we are expanding the use of large and medium sites, including former military sites, as alternative accommodation to hotels. \n\nLarge sites (such as former MOD sites) offer a sustainable solution for housing asylum seekers. Accommodation on former military sites is designed to be largely self-sufficient, with essential services being provided on site to minimise impacts on the local community and upon local services and offer better longer-term value for money. They reduce pressure on communities whilst also giving us greater oversight and control at critical points in the asylum decision making process. \n\nLessons have been learned from inherited acquisitions of accommodation under the previous government, which we are implementing to inform future accommodation procurement. No final decision will be taken regarding the new or existing sites until all necessary arrangements, assessments and approvals are in place and all factors have been properly considered. \n\nThe Home Office is already engaging with local authorities, police, health partners and other stakeholders in areas where there are proposed sites that may potentially be used: to understand local concerns, share information and support effective planning whilst also ensuring sites operate safely and respectfully, with robust measures in place to support community cohesion and maintain public safety at all times.  \n\nFor any sites taken forward, engagement takes place through established multi-agency forums and regular discussions with local authorities, NHS partners, police forces, and other stakeholders.  This ensures local concerns, community impacts, service pressures and public safety considerations are properly understood and considered as planning and delivery work progresses.  \n\nIt is imperative that we fix this system. Only by restoring order and control to our borders can we be the open, tolerant and generous country that we know ourselves to be.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-09-09T09:21:46.001Z","updated_at":"2026-09-09T09:21:46.001Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":768395,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/768395.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make carbon monoxide alarms mandatory in all holiday accommodation","background":"We ask the UK Government to introduce legislation requiring all holiday accommodation, including short-term lets and rentals, to install and maintain working carbon monoxide alarms, with mandatory regular safety checks and proper enforcement.","additional_details":"This petition is written by a mother whose heart has been broken forever. My daughter and her boyfriend died from carbon monoxide poisoning whilst on holiday in Bridlington. Carbon monoxide is a silent, preventable killer. No family should go away and not come home. Stronger laws are needed to ensure all holiday accommodation has working carbon monoxide alarms to prevent further devastating loss.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":24047,"closing_date":"2026-11-27","created_at":"2026-04-26T16:56:22.970Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T07:54:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-27T14:53:34.279Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-26T17:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-11T21:45:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.399Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Devon Andrews","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-02","summary":"The Government supports carbon monoxide safety through existing regulation; we will engage with regulators and across government departments to consider whether additional measures are needed.","details":"Carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas that cannot be seen, smelt or tasted. We are very sorry to hear of your loss and offer our deepest condolences to you and all those affected. The Government recognises the devastating impact of carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning and is committed to protecting people from its risks through a range of regulatory measures.\n\nStatutory guidance in Approved Document J of the Building Regulations sets out provision for carbon monoxide alarms where certain new or replacement fixed combustion appliances are installed in dwellings. These requirements apply regardless of whether a property is a main residence, second home, short-term let or holiday accommodation. The requirements were strengthened in 2022 to cover new or replacement fixed combustion appliances of any fuel type, other than gas cookers. Approved Document J can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/combustion-appliances-and-fuel-storage-systems-approved-document-j\n\nThe Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm (England) Regulations 2015 require private and social landlords to install carbon monoxide alarms in rooms used as living accommodation that contain a fixed combustion appliance, other than a gas cooker. These regulations can apply to holiday accommodation covered by a tenancy, but do not generally apply to holiday accommodation occupied under a licence. These regulations can be found at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2015/9780111133439/contents\n\nCarbon monoxide safety is supported by wider legislation. The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 require gas appliances, fittings and flues to be installed and maintained safely, and can be found at  https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l56.htm\n\nThe Health and Safety Executive advises that proper installation, servicing and maintenance of appliances are among the most effective ways of reducing the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. The Health and Safety Executive provides advice on Gas safety for landlords and letting agents. This advice can be found at https://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/domestic/faqlandlord.htm\n\nThe Government also publishes fire safety guidance for small premises providing accommodation for paying guests, including holiday caravans, lodges and similar accommodation. This recommends carbon monoxide detectors where living accommodation contains a gas or solid fuel-burning appliance. The guidance can be found at  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-your-small-paying-guest-accommodation-safe-from-fire/making-your-small-paying-guest-accommodation-safe-from-fire-accessible\n\nWe recognise that some types of holiday accommodation, including caravans, park homes and similar mobile structures fall outside the scope of the Building Regulations regime for which the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is responsible. We will therefore engage with other government departments and regulators to enable government to consider the best way for this to be addressed.\n\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.396Z","updated_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.396Z"},"debate":null,"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":764375,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764375.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Codify rules for MPs' attendance in Parliament & their constituency in statute","background":"Codify in statute clear and binding obligations for MPs on time spent in their constituency and in Parliament. We think that leaving it to convention unfortunately allows a minority to abuse the system.","additional_details":"MPs are well paid from the public purse to represent the people, and it is important to ensure that they fulfil their responsibilities once elected. We find current arrangements unpalatable and want statutory rules to be introduced with stronger mechanisms to hold them to account if they fail to carry out their duties.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":23918,"closing_date":"2026-10-15","created_at":"2026-03-15T09:00:23.466Z","updated_at":"2026-10-11T07:56:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-15T15:10:50.517Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-15T11:57:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-26T07:55:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-16T14:38:21.311Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Caroline Hurst","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-16","summary":"The Government is committed to maintaining high standards of conduct in public life, but has no plans to introduce rules to codify or mandate MPs' attendance in Parliament or their constituencies. ","details":"Under the UK’s constitutional framework, it is ultimately for voters to \njudge whether their elected representative is fulfilling their duties \neffectively. \n\nMembers of Parliament are not employees; they are independently \nelected office holders, chosen by their constituents to represent them in \nthe House of Commons. As they do not have an employer-employee \nrelationship with either the government or parliamentary authorities, \nthere is no formal mechanism, employment contract or statute that \ndictates their working hours or daily location.\n\nThe role of an MP requires considerable flexibility to balance varied \nresponsibilities. A lack of physical presence in the House of Commons \nChamber does not mean an MP is not working; they may be scrutinising \npolicy or legislation in committee, meeting with ministers on behalf of \nconstituents, or managing local casework. Mandating a strict statutory \nsplit between Westminster and constituency time would restrict an MP's \nability to respond dynamically to local or national priorities.\n\nWhilst general daily attendance is not legally mandated, there are \nalready robust mechanisms in place to ensure MPs remain accountable \nto the public and to Parliament:\n\n● The Code of Conduct: All MPs must adhere to the Commons Code \nof Conduct, which is supervised by the independent Parliamentary \nCommissioner for Standards and the Commons Committee on \nStandards. The Code is underpinned by the Seven Principles of \nPublic Life (the Nolan Principles), which call on all office holders, \nincluding MPs, to act with integrity and openness.\n\n● The political party system: Political parties manage attendance for \nkey parliamentary business, such as votes (divisions) and debates, \nthrough their respective whips.\n\n● Select committee attendance: Select committees publish data on \nthe attendance records of their members. In addition, in 2010 the \nHouse of Commons introduced rules enabling the removal of an \nMP from a select committee if they fail to attend at least 60% of its \nformal meetings during a session.\n\n● The Recall of MPs Act 2015: The recall process allows \nconstituents to sign a petition to trigger a by-election and remove \ntheir MP from office if specific triggers are met, such as \nimprisonment following a criminal conviction, suspension from the \nHouse of the requisite length, or false expenses claims.\n\nIn addition, the public may scrutinise an MP's activity by examining \nminutes of committee meetings and records of debates or divisions, all \nof which are routinely published on the Parliament website.\n\nIn recognition of the fact that MPs should be focusing on their \nparliamentary duties and representing their constituents, the government \nhas also committed to banning second jobs for MPs, outside of very \nlimited exceptions such as for maintaining a professional qualification. \nThe House of Commons’ Committee on Standards is currently \nexamining this matter.\n\nUltimately, the government believes that the most effective and \ndemocratic mechanism for holding MPs to account is the electoral \nprocess itself. Every general election provides constituents with the \ndirect opportunity to scrutinise their MP’s track record, visibility and \ncommitment to their area. Voters can, and sometimes do, choose to \nremove MPs whom they feel have failed to adequately engage with \neither their parliamentary or constituency responsibilities.\n\nBy keeping this responsibility with the electorate rather than codified in \nlaw, the UK preserves the essential principle that MPs answer directly to \nthe people they represent.\n\nOffice of the Leader of the House of Commons","created_at":"2026-06-16T14:38:21.308Z","updated_at":"2026-06-16T14:44:31.971Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}}]}