{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2&state=debated","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=debated","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=3&state=debated","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=3&state=debated","prev":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=debated"},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":746363,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746363.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep 5-Year ILR and Restrict Access to Benefits for New ILR Holders","background":"The Government should keep the current 5-year route to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and restrict access to government benefits for new ILR holders.","additional_details":"Extending the ILR route to 10 years would unfairly affect thousands of Skilled Worker visa holders who moved to the UK based on existing 5-year rules, disrupting their plans, families, and financial stability. The Government should keep the 5-year ILR route and ensuring new ILR holders demonstrate financial independence before accessing public benefits. We think this protect fairness and stability. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":244451,"created_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:06.069Z","updated_at":"2026-08-28T13:44:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-18T12:20:30.212Z","closed_at":"2026-05-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T15:40:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-22T12:36:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.923Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T15:53:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:49:54.168Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"As set out in the Immigration White Paper, the default qualifying period doubles to 10 years. We welcome views on other measures, including access to benefits, via the earned settlement consultation.","details":"Settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. It is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. It marks an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nUnder the current system, individuals qualify for settlement primarily on the basis of the length of time they have spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\n\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in the UK. Moreover, they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\n\nWe therefore intend to fundamentally reform our settlement rules for the first time in over 50 years. The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, set out that the default qualifying period for settlement would be increased from five to ten years. It also included proposals for a new ‘earned settlement’ model which are subject to consultation.\n\nThe consultation on the ‘earned settlement’ model launched on 20 November 2025 and will run for 12 weeks until 12 February 2026. It is open to anyone who wishes to share their views, including individuals, organisations and other stakeholders who may be affected by, or have an interest in, the proposed changes.\n\nWe are proposing to increase the baseline qualifying period for settlement to 15 years for those on the Skilled Worker route in a role below RQF level 6 (equivalent to a bachelor’s degree). \n\nIn the next five years, settlement volumes are forecast to increase significantly, due to the unprecedented level of migration to the UK in recent years. Between 2021 and 2024, there was significant growth in lower-skilled migration on work routes, particularly on the Health and Social Care visa, which is estimated to make up 47% of settlement grants in 2028.\n\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\n\nSpeaking English at degree level, earning a high salary and being employed in specific public service roles would result in a reduction. However, where a person has claimed public funds or committed immigration offences, they would face a penalty of extra years. \n\nWe are also proposing that benefits and social housing might not be available to new migrants granted settled status and that instead they should be reserved for those who have achieved British citizenship, easing the pressure on public finances.\n\nFor those who are on a pathway to settlement but have not yet been granted settled status, we are consulting on transitional arrangements for these individuals. \n\nWe would encourage anyone with an interest in the proposals, including the petitioners who have taken the time to sign this petition, to contribute to the consultation. We realise the significance of these proposals to people and we will listen carefully to what they tell us.\n\nFurther details on the proposals and the link to respond to the consultation can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/earned-settlement\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727372,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727372.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect Legal Migrants: do not implement the 10-Year ILR proposal","background":"We urge the UK Government to scrap plans to extend ILR from 5 to 10 years. We feel that legal migrants, especially care workers, followed the rules and built lives here under the 5-year promise. We think they support vital services and deserve fairness, not shifting rules.","additional_details":"We think that retroactively extending ILR from 5 to 10 years is unfair. We are concerned that it creates insecurity for legal migrants, disrupts vital sectors like health and care, and adds financial strain. We urge the UK Government to withdraw this proposal, protect visa renewals, and prioritise tackling illegal migration. Do not penalise those who follow the law, support the economy, and uphold British values. We think legal migration must be protected, not discouraged.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":106570,"created_at":"2025-05-12T18:11:04.037Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T10:27:55.471Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-23T15:26:53.533Z","closed_at":"2025-11-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T21:44:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-03T09:34:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.530Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-13T10:18:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:48:30.921Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"The earned settlement consultation is seeking views on whether the increase in settlement qualifying period will apply to people already in the UK. No decision has been taken on this point.","details":"The Government is grateful for the vital contribution legal migrants make to the UK, including the dedication of overseas health and care workers who deliver high quality care and strengthen our public services.\n\nThis issue has already been the subject of previous petitions and parliamentary debate earlier this year, including the e-petition ‘Keep the 5-Year ILR pathway for existing Skilled Worker visa holders’ (Petition 727360) and ‘Keep 5-year ILR terms to Hong Kong British National (Overseas) visas’ (Petition 727356), which was debated in Westminster Hall on 8 September 2025. The Home Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into ‘Routes to Settlement’ on 21 October 2025.\n\nAs set out by the Home Secretary in ‘A Fairer Pathway to Settlement’, the Government is proposing a new, contribution-based settlement model. Under these proposals, the standard qualifying period for settlement will be 10 years. However, individuals will have the opportunity to reduce this period if they demonstrate strong contributions to the UK’s economy and society for example, through sustained employment, National Insurance contributions, English language ability, a clean criminal record, and positive community engagement. Those who have been non-compliant may be required to wait longer or be refused settlement.\n\nThese are proposals only. No final decisions have been made, and we launched a consultation on the earned settlement proposals on 20 November 2025. The consultation will run for 12 weeks (until 12 February 2026) and is open to all interested parties, including migrants, employers, representative bodies, and members of the public. Its purpose is to gather a wide range of views and evidence on the proposed changes, including the impact on those already in the UK and the practicalities of implementation. The consultation is, in particular, seeking views on whether there should be transitional arrangements for those already on a pathway to settlement.\n\nThe Government is committed to a transparent and inclusive process. The consultation is being publicised widely, and responses can be submitted online or in writing. All feedback will be carefully considered before any final decisions are made. A summary of responses and the Government’s conclusions will be published after the consultation closes, ensuring that the process is open and accountable. Following the consultation, we will provide full details of how the new model would work, including any transitional arrangements for people already in the UK. We encourage all affected groups including health and care workers to take part in the consultation so that their views and evidence inform the final approach.\n\nSettlement in the UK is a significant step, bringing lifelong benefits and supporting integration into local communities and the wider country. The Government’s aim is to ensure that settlement is earned through contribution and integration, while maintaining strong safeguards for the most vulnerable. The new model will continue to offer a shorter pathway to settlement for non-UK dependants of British citizens and retain existing protections for victims of domestic violence and abuse.\nWe recognise the concerns raised about fairness and the impact on those who have built their lives in the UK under the current system. We will consider these issues carefully, and no changes will be made without listening to the views of those affected.\n\nFurther information on the proposals announced by the Home Secretary is available in Ministerial statements, November 2025 Command Paper, as well as the May 2025 Immigration White Paper.\n\nWe are grateful to the petitioners for setting out their views, and we look forward to hearing from them again when they have had the opportunity to study the final proposals in detail.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":718660,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce Licensing and Regulation for Dog and Cat Rescues to Protect Welfare\r\n","background":"Many UK animal rescues operate without clear legal oversight, creating opportunities for unethical practices. Some rescues have been linked to supporting irresponsible breeding, neglecting animals, or misusing public donations. ","additional_details":"Without enforceable standards, there is a risk that animals suffer in poor conditions, and public trust is undermined. We call on the Government to introduce mandatory licensing and regular inspections to ensure rescues operate transparently and uphold high welfare standards. Regulation is essential to prevent cruelty, improve accountability, and ensure all rescued animals receive proper care.  \r\n \r\nBy introducing clear legal requirements, the Government can safeguard animal welfare, protect public confidence in rescues, and prevent organizations from operating irresponsibly.  ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109647,"created_at":"2025-02-21T07:32:44.335Z","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:55:27.633Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-08T14:27:32.559Z","closed_at":"2025-10-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-27T21:44:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-16T17:49:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.733Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-17T07:50:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-26","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-27T09:50:42.023Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-10","summary":"Animal rescue organisations must meet existing statutory welfare requirements. Moving forward, the Government is developing an animal welfare strategy and will outline more detail in due course.","details":"The Government appreciates the important work that responsible animal sanctuaries as well as rescue and rehoming organisations do, often on a voluntary basis, to ensure that animals taken into the care of these organisations are offered the opportunity of a forever home. \n\nThere are existing protections under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, whereby any person responsible for an animal, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, has a duty to ensure the welfare of the animals in their care. Companion animal rescue and rehoming organisations in England and Wales must therefore comply with statutory welfare requirements set out in the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Therefore, the Department encourages individuals to report any concerns regarding whether these standards are being met to the relevant local authority, which has powers to investigate.\n\nMembers of the public can also check if the rescue centre they use is a member of the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes, which has set clear standards for animal assessments, neutering and rehoming procedures that all members adhere to.\n\nMore broadly, the Department is developing an overarching approach to animal welfare and, as part of this, is actively considering the animal welfare protections in place in rescue and rehoming centres, including whether there is a need for additional guidance or regulation. The Department has also initiated a series of meetings with key animal welfare stakeholders as part of this wider work. We will be outlining more detail in due course.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660)","created_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.731Z","updated_at":"2025-07-17T10:45:39.625Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-26/debates/D4C51DDC-9C32-4F43-B598-CB8C3C82B90F/AnimalRescueCentres","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuVIHqnrV5M","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0013/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/licensing-regulation-animal-rescues/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729440,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729440.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make Play and Continuous Provision statutory in England's Key Stage 1 Curriculum","background":"Revise statutory guidance for KS1 to make play based pedagogy a core part of the Key Stage One National Curriculum, extending the best practice that we see in Early Years to ensure all Key Stage One children continue to have a developmentally appropriate play based approach to their learning.","additional_details":"The Early Years Framework highlights the importance of play. However, as children transition to Year 1 and throughout KS1, many may experience a stark shift to formal teaching strategies. We think this fails to reflect how young children learn best. We want our children to access a reformed education system that meets their developmental needs, supports wellbeing, allows for movement, communication, play and develops a true love of learning, enabling all children to thrive.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":106082,"created_at":"2025-06-04T22:00:07.094Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T10:28:27.465Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-03T12:54:20.577Z","closed_at":"2026-01-03T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-05T09:36:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-05T11:51:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.577Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-30T22:10:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-26","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-27T09:47:52.250Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-01","summary":"We recognise play is critical to children’s wellbeing and development which is why the Department is working to make sure that all children have access to these enrichment opportunities at school.","details":"The Department is working to make sure that all children and young people have access to a variety of enrichment opportunities at school, as an important part of our mission to break down barriers to opportunity. For some schools, these opportunities may be used to encourage children and young people to play.\n\nWe recognise that play is critical to children’s wellbeing and development, as highlighted in the Centre for Young Lives’ Everything to Play For report. This is reflected in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) statutory framework, which is clear that play is essential for children’s learning and development. The EYFS emphasises the importance of creating opportunities for indoor and outdoor play, and enabling environments and cultures for high-quality play.\n\nOur expectation is for schools to organise the school day and school week in the best interests of their pupil cohort, to both provide them with a full time education suitable to their age, aptitude and ability, and to provide opportunities for schools to incorporate time for play and other activities.\n\nWe recognise the current key stage 1 curriculum requires reform. This is why the Government established an independent Curriculum and Assessment Review, to look into issues, such as this, and make recommendations to improve the curriculum for children. The Review Group is currently looking across the existing national curriculum and statutory assessment system, to ensure they meet the needs of young people in your area and across England.\n\nThe Review’s final report and recommendations will be published in autumn, at which point the Government will be in a position to consider any changes to the curriculum. The Government will consult with education experts, teachers, and parents to ensure the very best for children in England.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.575Z","updated_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.575Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-26/debates/95E8607E-8004-4B1F-A74A-18505A90FAE2/KeyStage1Curriculum","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HS6698xi0M","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0020/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/play-curriculum/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":732559,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732559.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council approved events only","background":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public to minimise the harm caused to vulnerable people and animals. Defenceless animals can die from the distress caused by fireworks.\r\n\r\nI believe that permitting unregulated use of fireworks is an act of wide-scale cruelty to animals.","additional_details":" \r\n \r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":195930,"created_at":"2025-07-06T14:27:42.186Z","updated_at":"2026-07-25T11:52:43.852Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-20T10:08:00.535Z","closed_at":"2026-02-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-06T20:30:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T18:36:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.287Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-09T20:23:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:23:55.089Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-18","summary":"The Government recognises the negative impact fireworks can have on some people and animals.  However, when used responsibly they are a source of enjoyment for many people. ","details":"The Government’s intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, while reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused.\n\nAt this point in time the Government does not have any plans to ban the sale of fireworks to consumers. We have launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside encouraging people to consider going to a public display. Public displays are more likely to be well-publicised, providing people with an opportunity to prepare ahead of the display taking place. The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks. This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately. My safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA regulatory framework currently controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks to consumers. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine.  There is also a maximum noise level of 120 decibels with many retailers also offering ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks.\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.  \n\nTo inform any future action the Government will continue to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.  \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.285Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T12:57:00.440Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DBIST","name":"Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum noise level for consumer fireworks from 120 to 90 decibels","background":"We think each year, individuals suffer because of loud fireworks. We believe horses, dogs, cats, livestock and wildlife can be terrified by noisy fireworks and many people find them intolerable.","additional_details":"There is independent research suggesting: \r\n\r\n• Over half of dog owners report fireworks-anxiety in their dog\r\n• There’s an 81% increase in missing dogs around Bonfire Night\r\n• Almost 25% of military veterans say fireworks have caused a negative experience for them\r\n\r\nWe think both humans and animals are less likely to be distressed by fireworks noise below 90dB. We believe lower noise levels would allow fireworks to be enjoyed while potentially reducing some of their many negative impacts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":184376,"created_at":"2025-08-18T08:48:05.528Z","updated_at":"2026-07-25T11:54:43.280Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T13:29:13.913Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-18T09:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T15:43:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.890Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T14:00:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:22:32.649Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-07","summary":"The Government recognises that some people have strong feelings about fireworks and has been listening to concerns raised by members of the public regarding the impact of firework noise.","details":"The Government's intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property.  Current regulations control their sale, availability, and use, including setting a maximum noise level of 120 decibels for consumer fireworks. Many retailers also offer ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks which are available to purchase by consumers.\n\nFireworks, when used responsibly are a source of enjoyment for many people.  The Government recognises however the concerns raised by signatories to this petition regarding the potential impact fireworks can have on communities and animals.  \n\nThe Government is engaging with businesses, consumer groups and charities to better understand the issues with and impacts of fireworks. Noise is one of the key issues we are seeking views on. The Government is also considering the experience of other countries where lower noise limits are in place for consumer fireworks to understand the impact this has had and to identify best practice.\n\nFor this fireworks season, to ensure people continue to use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner, the Government has launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside considerate use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.  The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks.  \n\nMy safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used. \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192)","created_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.887Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T15:28:36.600Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727309,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727309.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Call an immediate general election","background":"We want an immediate general election to be held. We think the majority need and want change.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1059229,"created_at":"2025-05-12T05:53:57.501Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T10:44:14.990Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-05T09:37:54.250Z","closed_at":"2025-12-05T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-13T16:30:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T15:06:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.937Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-06T11:53:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-12","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-14T17:20:59.292Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-11","summary":"This Government was elected on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election. Our full focus is on fixing the foundations, rebuilding Britain, and restoring public confidence in government.","details":"The Prime Minister can call a general election at a time of their choosing by requesting a dissolution of Parliament from the Sovereign within the five-year life of a Parliament. The Government was elected by the British people on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election.\n\nThis Government is fixing the foundations and delivering change with investment and reform to deliver growth, with more jobs, more money in people’s pockets, to rebuild Britain and get the NHS back on its feet. This will be built on the strong foundations of a stable economy, national security and secure borders as we put politics back in the service of working people.\n\nOn entering office, a £22 billion black hole was identified in the nation’s finances. We inherited unprecedented challenges, with crumbling public services and crippled public finances, but will deliver a decade of national renewal through our five missions: economic growth, fixing the NHS, safer streets, making Britain a clean energy super-power and opportunity for all. This is what was promised and is what we are delivering.\n\nThe Government’s first Budget freed up tens of billions of pounds to invest in Britain’s future while locking in stability, preventing devastating austerity in our public services and protecting working people’s payslips.\n\nMission-led government rejects the sticking-plaster solutions of the past and unites public and private sectors, national, devolved and local government, business and unions, and the whole of civil society in a shared purpose. The Government will continue to deliver the manifesto of change that it was elected on.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.935Z","updated_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:38.590Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-12","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-12/debates/49F4AFFB-2D48-44D4-AE24-1DC5262CD9C7/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/9A_Mm9hZO4o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0251/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727514,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727514.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the school week to four days a week","background":"We urge the Government to require all schools to reduce the school week to four instead of five days by making each school day one hour longer whilst requiring the school week to be four instead of five days.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":126014,"created_at":"2025-05-14T09:44:32.926Z","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:54:56.582Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T10:13:43.683Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-14T10:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-18T06:28:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.659Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-20T13:29:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-05","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-06T10:12:33.567Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-10","summary":"The government has no plans to reduce the school week to four days. Regular attendance at school is vital for children’s education, well-being and long-term development as well as parental employment.","details":"The government has no plans to require schools to reduce the length of the school week from five days to four by adding an additional hour to each of the four days.\n\nTo ensure children across the country have sufficient time in school to enable them to achieve and thrive, the Government has set a minimum expectation that all state-funded, mainstream schools will deliver a minimum school week of 32 hours and 30 minutes. Consistency in the length of the school week is essential for providing equal learning opportunities that will enable children and young people to achieve and thrive. While most state funded schools already meet this requirement, schools that don’t are encouraged to move towards doing so as soon as possible. \n\nReducing the school week to four days whilst still delivering the minimum expectation would mean a minimum school day of over 8 hours. Schools would have to deliver an additional 1 hour and 38 minutes per day across the four days to meet the weekly minimum requirement. \n\nReducing the school week would also have a damaging impact on parents, many of whom would need to make additional arrangements for childcare, reduce their working hours or potentially leave the workforce altogether. This would in turn put families under financial strain and have a damaging effect on the country’s economy.\n\nBeing in school, enjoying a broad and balanced education and achieving academically are key protective factors that help to promote mental health and well-being. Considering the wider benefits of time in school, the government therefore has no plans to reduce the school week from five days to four.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.656Z","updated_at":"2025-10-13T12:40:29.512Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-05","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-01-05/debates/19F9E3C3-4B57-4221-BC1F-38C236441355/LengthOfTheSchoolWeek","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/JJDrsAcGzHY","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07148/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/length-school-week/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":702845,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702845.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Extend free bus travel for people over 60 in England","background":"We call on the Government to extend free bus travel to all people over 60 years old in England outside London. We believe the current situation is unjust and we want equality for everyone over 60. ","additional_details":"Currently, people in England who do not live in London are not entitled to free bus travel until they reach the state pension age, which we believe has changed dramatically. As people get older some over 60s drive less and less, therefore we believe we need equality on public transport. It would mean England had the same provision as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":101204,"created_at":"2024-11-24T12:27:59.770Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T16:33:35.784Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-27T11:26:30.209Z","closed_at":"2025-06-27T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-25T06:06:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-05T05:30:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.210Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-26T15:26:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-05","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-06T10:11:15.488Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-12","summary":"The English National Concessionary Travel Scheme costs around £700 million annually. Any changes to the statutory scheme must be carefully considered for their impact on its financial sustainability. ","details":"The government wants everyone to have access to public transport and is committed to improving services. We also recognise the importance of the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) in supporting local bus travel, assisting with access to essential local services and helping those who use it to stay active and avoid isolation.\n\nThe ENCTS provides free off-peak bus travel to those with eligible disabilities and those of state pension age, currently sixty-six. The ENCTS costs around £700 million annually and any changes to the statutory obligations, such as lowering the age of eligibility, would therefore need to be carefully considered for its impact on the scheme’s financial sustainability.   \n\nLocal authorities in England do have the power to offer concessions in addition to their statutory obligations, for example, by extending the age of eligibility for the older persons’ bus pass. These are additional local concessions provided and funded by local authorities from local resources, depending on the needs and priorities of each area.\n\nAt the Budget on 30 October, the government confirmed a £1 billion boost for buses, of which £712 million has been allocated to local authorities to support and improve bus services. Funding allocated to local authorities to improve services for passengers can be used in whichever way they wish. This could include extending the discretionary concessions available in the local area.\n\nConcessionary travel is a devolved policy area and as such, the eligibility age for the bus pass differs between the devolved nations of the United Kingdom. This means, in effect, that there are different schemes in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, so the administrative arrangements are entirely separate.\n\nDepartment for Transport","created_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.208Z","updated_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.208Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-05","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-01-05/debates/B84513B0-9668-4082-B440-DCFB18F22112/FreeBusTravelOver-60S","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/id1c1yZlOMY","debate_pack_url":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722903,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Repeal the Online Safety Act","background":"We want the Government to repeal the Online Safety act. ","additional_details":"We believe that the scope of the Online Safety act is far broader and restrictive than is necessary in a free society.\r\nFor instance, the definitions in Part 2 covers online hobby forums, which we think do not have the resource to comply with the act and so are shutting down instead.\r\nWe think that Parliament should repeal the act and work towards producing proportionate legislation rather than risking clamping down on civil society talking about trains, football, video games or even hamsters because it can't deal with individual bad faith actors.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":550136,"created_at":"2025-03-20T19:05:13.386Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.046Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-22T14:53:36.080Z","closed_at":"2025-10-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-21T00:04:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-15T10:34:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.825Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-25T19:21:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-15","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-04T10:18:45.939Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-28","summary":"The Government is working with Ofcom to ensure that online in-scope services are subject to robust but proportionate regulation through the effective implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023. ","details":"I would like to thank all those who signed the petition. It is right that the regulatory regime for in scope online services takes a proportionate approach, balancing the protection of users from online harm with the ability for low-risk services to operate effectively and provide benefits to users.\n\nThe Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.\n\nProportionality is a core principle of the Act and is in-built into its duties. As regulator for the online safety regime, Ofcom must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements. Duties in the Communications Act 2003 require Ofcom to act with proportionality and target action only where it is needed.\n\nSome duties apply to all user-to-user and search services in scope of the Act. This includes risk assessments, including determining if children are likely to access the service and, if so, assessing the risks of harm to children. While many services carry low risks of harm, the risk assessment duties are key to ensuring that risky services of all sizes do not slip through the net of regulation. For example, the Government is very concerned about small platforms that host harmful content, such as forums dedicated to encouraging suicide or self-harm. Exempting small services from the Act would mean that services like these forums would not be subject to the Act’s enforcement powers. Even forums that might seem harmless carry potential risks, such as where adults come into contact with child users.\n\nOnce providers have carried out their duties to conduct risk assessments, they must protect the users of their service from the identified risks of harm. Ofcom’s illegal content Codes of Practice set out recommended measures to help providers comply with these obligations, measures that are tailored in relation to both size and risk. If a provider’s risk assessment accurately determines that the risks faced by users are low across all harms, Ofcom’s Codes specify that they only need some basic measures, including:\n\n• easy-to-find, understandable terms and conditions;\n• a complaints tool that allows users to report illegal material when they see it, backed up by a process to deal with those complaints;\n• the ability to review content and take it down if it is illegal (or breaches their terms of service);\n• a specific individual responsible for compliance, who Ofcom can contact if needed.\n\nWhere a children's access assessment indicates a platform is likely to be accessed by children, a subsequent risk assessment must be conducted to identify measures for mitigating risks. Like the Codes of Practice on illegal content, Ofcom’s recently issued child safety Codes also tailor recommendations based on risk level. For example, highly effective age assurance is recommended for services likely accessed by children that do not already prohibit and remove harmful content such as pornography and suicide promotion.  Providers of services likely to be accessed by UK children were required to complete their assessment, which Ofcom may request, by 24 July.\n\nOn 8 July, Ofcom’s CEO wrote to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology noting Ofcom’s responsibility for regulating a wide range of highly diverse services, including those run by businesses, but also charities, community and voluntary groups, individuals, and many services that have not been regulated before.\n\nThe letter notes that the Act’s aim is not to penalise small, low-risk services trying to comply in good faith. Ofcom – and the Government – recognise that many small services are dynamic small businesses supporting innovation and offer significant value to their communities. Ofcom will take a sensible approach to enforcement with smaller services that present low risk to UK users, only taking action where it is proportionate and appropriate, and will focus on cases where the risk and impact of harm is highest.\n\nOfcom has developed an extensive programme of work designed to support a smoother journey to compliance, particularly for smaller firms. This has been underpinned by interviews, workshops and research with a diverse range of online services to ensure the tools meet the needs of different types of services. Ofcom’s letter notes its ‘guide for services’ guidance and tools hub, and its participation in events run by other organisations and networks including those for people running small services, as well as its commitment to review and improve materials and tools to help support services to create a safer life online.\n\nThe Government will continue to work with Ofcom towards the full implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, including monitoring proportionate implementation.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z","updated_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-12-15/debates/DA0F7CFE-CCED-4864-BCCF-160E0AF56F92/OnlineSafetyAct2023Repeal","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ixue9rQbi0","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0224/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":730194,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730194.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not introduce Digital ID cards","background":"We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.","additional_details":"We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We oppose the creation of any national ID system. \r\n \r\nID cards were scrapped in 2010, in our view for good reason.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2984191,"created_at":"2025-06-12T15:26:34.449Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:25.998Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-09T15:28:15.595Z","closed_at":"2026-01-09T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T16:12:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-03T12:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.956Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-22T12:28:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-09T13:28:36.897Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-02","summary":"We will introduce a digital ID within this Parliament to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies. We will consult on details soon. ","details":"The Government has announced plans to introduce a digital ID system which is fit for the needs of modern Britain. We are committed to making people’s everyday lives easier and more secure, to putting more control in their hands (including over their own data), and to driving growth through harnessing digital technology. We also want to learn from countries which have digitised government services for the benefit of their citizens, in line with our manifesto commitment to modernise government.\n\nCurrently, when UK citizens and residents use public services, start a new job, or, for example, buy alcohol, they often need to present an assortment of physical documents to prove who they are or things about themselves. This is both bureaucratic for the individual and creates space for abuse and fraud. This includes known issues with illegal working and modern slavery, while the fragmented approach and multiple systems across Government make it difficult for people to access vital services. Further, there are too many people who are excluded, like the 1 in 10 UK adults who don’t have a physical photo ID, so can struggle to prove who they are and access the products and services they are entitled to.\n\nTo tackle these interlinked issues, we will introduce a new national digital ID. This is not a card but a new digital identity that will be available for free to all UK citizens and legal residents aged 16 and over (although we will consider through consultation if this should be age 13 and over). Over time, people will be able to use it to seamlessly access a range of public and private sector services, with the aim of making our everyday lives easier and more secure. It will not be compulsory to obtain a digital ID but it will be mandatory for some applications.\n\nFor example, the new digital ID will build on GOV.UK One Login and the GOV.UK Wallet to drive the transformation of public services. Over time, this system will allow people to access government services – such as benefits or tax records – without needing to remember multiple logins or provide physical documents. It will significantly streamline interactions with the state, saving time and reducing frustrating paperwork, while also helping to create opportunities for more joined up government services. International examples show how beneficial this can be. For instance, Estonia’s system reportedly saves each citizen hours every month by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, and the move to becoming a digital society has saved taxpayer money.\n\nBy the end of this Parliament, employers will have to check the new digital ID when conducting a ‘right to work’ check. This will help combat criminal gangs who promise access to the UK labour market in order to profit from dangerous and illegal channel crossings. It will create a fairer system between UK citizens and legal residents, crack down on forged documents, and streamline the process for employers, driving up compliance. Further, it will create business information showing where employers are conducting checks, so driving more targeted action against non-compliant employers.\n\nFor clarity, it will not be a criminal offence to not hold a digital ID and police will not be able to demand to see a digital ID as part of a “stop and search.”\n\nPrivacy and security will also be central to the digital ID programme. We will follow data protection law and best practice in creating a system which people can rightly put their trust in. People in the UK already know and trust digital credentials held in their phone wallets to use in their everyday lives, from paying for things to storing boarding passes. The new system will be built on similar technology and be your boarding pass to government. Digitally checkable digital credentials are more secure than physical documents which can be lost, copied or forged, and often mean sharing more information than just what is necessary for a given transaction.\nThe new system will be designed in accordance with the highest security standards to protect against a comprehensive range of threats, including cyber-attacks.\n\nWe will launch a public consultation in the coming weeks and work closely with employers, trade unions, civil society groups and other stakeholders, to co-design the scheme and ensure it is as secure and inclusive as possible. Following consultation, we will seek to bring forward legislation to underpin this system.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.953Z","updated_at":"2025-10-02T15:29:00.740Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-08/debates/9E01F17C-557A-4D02-8A93-B573721B8B20/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/dCGWpaAfJIw","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10369/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722377,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722377.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Withdraw the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill","background":"We call on the Government to withdraw the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill. We believe it downgrades education for all children, and undermines educators and parents. If it is not withdrawn, we believe it may cause more harm to children and their educational opportunities than it helps","additional_details":"We believe the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill is poorly drafted and does not stem from robust evidence. We feel the accompanying impact assessments are inadequate and may damage all children's educational opportunities. We believe the Bill is silent on children’s voice and children's right to education. We also feel part 2 undermines parental responsibility for education and school leaders from ensuring their educational settings can optimise children's education and wellbeing.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":166495,"created_at":"2025-03-16T12:52:25.657Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:25.987Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-25T13:20:14.902Z","closed_at":"2025-10-25T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-24T17:53:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-02T17:08:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-09-16T13:19:48.433Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-07T21:01:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-01","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-05T18:53:31.026Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-09-16","summary":"The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill puts in place a package of support to drive high and rising standards throughout our education and care systems so that every child can achieve and thrive.","details":"Every child needs a safe, secure start in life and a high-quality education which provides the opportunity to succeed, regardless of background. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill will put in place a package of support to drive high and rising standards throughout our education and care systems so that every child can achieve and thrive. It will protect children at risk of abuse, stopping vulnerable children falling through cracks in services, and deliver a core guarantee of high standards with space for innovation in every child’s education.\n\nThe Bill has been developed in consultation with education and social care stakeholders to ensure that the measures included are both effective and practical. Its provisions are intended to complement and strengthen existing frameworks to support parents, school leaders and those working in the care system. The measures relating to home education, for example, have been introduced following years of extensive engagement and consultation. The government’s position remains that parents should have the right to home educate their children if they choose to do so, providing that the education being received is suitable and safe. \n\nThe government recognises the importance of the child’s voice in educational and wellbeing decisions. The Bill includes measures to ensure children’s perspectives are considered in relevant decisions affecting their education and wellbeing. The department has also conducted and published a Child Rights Impact Assessment, identifying where children are directly affected by policy and where certain groups of children and young people are more likely to be affected than others. For instance, under the School Attendance Order, local authorities will have a new power to request to visit the child in their home. This will provide an opportunity for the child to talk about their education. Local authorities should take the child’s opinion into account in their overall educational suitability decision where appropriate. In cases where parents are required to request permission from the local authority to home educate, the child’s wishes and feelings should be sought and considered, if reasonably practicable.\n\nRegarding concerns about parental rights and school leadership, the Bill is structured to support parents and educators in delivering high-quality education. Part 2 of the Bill provides frameworks to assist school leaders and families in delivering optimal educational outcomes and wellbeing. The Bill will create a floor for standards so every parent can have confidence that they can send their child to a good, local school, but no ceiling on innovation so leaders can drive forward policies for the benefit of the children and communities they serve. We are continuing to engage extensively with leaders from across the school system, including our high-quality multi-academy trusts, to ensure we drive collaboration and enable best practice to be shared up and down the country.\n\nThe government notes the issues outlined in this petition on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. We welcome views and engagement from the public and are committed to working closely with stakeholders to ensure that the Bill achieves its objectives. \n\nThe Bill is currently being debated at Committee stage in the House of Lords, where amendments to the Bill are debated in detail. Remaining debates can be watched here: https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Lords\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-09-16T13:19:48.430Z","updated_at":"2025-09-16T13:19:48.430Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-01","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-01/debates/D42A2D07-ADCB-489E-929B-6223A574DD44/details","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2sq0kjCzqU","debate_pack_url":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":706513,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/706513.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Every school & college to be obliged to have an evacuation chair & training","background":"I believe the government should make it a legal requirement for all schools and colleges to have evacuation chairs, and for all staff to be trained in using them.","additional_details":"Fires can spread very quickly.  Sign so disabled people feel safer!","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":104197,"created_at":"2024-11-29T18:11:28.685Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T18:48:04.050Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-02-18T16:21:42.902Z","closed_at":"2025-08-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-29T18:38:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-31T21:55:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-23T11:09:56.445Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-05T14:07:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-20","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-01","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-05T18:48:04.050Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-23","summary":"In a school or college, where a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) requires an evacuation chair, it must be provided. Staff and the person needing the chair must be trained in its use.","details":"The safety of all pupils and staff in schools and colleges is paramount. \nUnder the Equality Act 2010, schools and educational premises have a duty to make reasonable adjustments where necessary for anyone with a disability. All disabled learners and staff should have a Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP) in place should they need one, whether they have an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) or not.\n\nUnder current fire safety legislation, those who have responsibility for the building need to provide a fire safety risk assessment that includes an emergency evacuation plan for all people likely to be in the premises. This includes disabled people. When a learner with a disability, requiring assistance with building evacuation, is enrolled in a school or college, their PEEP should be developed with them as part of the admissions process. \n\nA PEEP is a tailored plan to ensure someone who may need assistance in a building evacuation can safely reach a place of safety. It is designed for individuals with impairments or disabilities that might make it difficult for them to evacuate on their own. PEEPs are developed collaboratively between the individual and relevant staff, such as managers, fire safety officers, or disability advisors, to ensure the plan is effective and meets their needs.\n\nA PEEP is a personal document relating to a specific individual. The requirements and preferences of individuals may vary, even when the disability is similar. While some disabled people will require the use of an evacuation chair, others would not welcome this as a means of escape. Additionally, almost half of schools in England are only single-storey buildings. This is why it is important the use of evacuation chairs should be determined on a case-by-case basis, at a local level based on the specific needs of the individual required one.\n\nAn evacuation chair looks like a deckchair with skis and wheels underneath. When placed on the stairway, it slides down the stairs. There are wheels at the back that facilitate movement on the flat, but they are not suitable for long distances.  \nAn evacuation chair is operated by one or two people and requires training and practice to use. Not all disabled people feel comfortable using these chairs and it is not always possible for wheelchair users to transfer into an evacuation chair or to maintain a sitting position once seated in one. Therefore, evacuation chairs should not be considered as an automatic solution to the escape requirements of wheelchair users.\n\nThe preferred options for escape of many people with mobility impairments are by horizontal evacuation to outside the building, horizontal evacuation into another fire compartment, or fire evacuation lift, eventually arriving at a place of safety. This is the preferable option for some disabled people. Within this group, many people will be able to manage stairs and to walk longer distances, especially if short rest periods are built into the escape procedure, although this won’t apply to all.\n\nPractice for PEEPs will depend on the type of escape required. Generally, escape plans should be practised on a regular basis and at least every six months. If the disabled person wants or needs to practise their route and plan more frequently, this should be written into their PEEP. For an evacuation chair to be used safely both the user and the operators must be well trained and familiar with the piece of equipment.\n\nAs well as comprehensive training regular practice should also take place. In most instances, these may not need to include the disabled person, although some may wish to practise being moved in the evacuation chair. It is more appropriate for the people who are trained to operate the evacuation chair to take it in turns during practices rather than involve the disabled person. This will also increase their confidence in using the equipment. Using an evacuation chair in practice may put the disabled person at unnecessary risk from injury, so it is best to limit their use by disabled people to the real situation.\n\nAll schools and colleges must also comply with Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, which means they must have an up-to-date fire risk assessment, appropriate fire alarms and regular fire drills. This is to ensure they are as safe as possible and well prepared in the event of a fire.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-06-23T11:09:56.442Z","updated_at":"2025-06-23T11:09:56.442Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-01","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-12-01/debates/47AB5506-6501-4D6F-8005-EB2827CC31A8/EvacuationChairsSchoolsAndColleges","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpbQvroz9lw&list=PLj3mInRJqIemzke3yWcmPaR5ZTW4S4bur&index=2","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0228/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700682,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700682.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Urgently fulfil humanitarian obligations to Gaza","background":"Act to ensure deliverer of fuel, food, aid, life saving services etc. We think this shouldn't be dependant/on condition of Israeli facilitation as the Knesset voted against UNWRA access to Gaza. We think if military delivery of aid, airdrops, peacekeepers etc, are needed, then all be considered.","additional_details":"Israel does not agree to ceasefire and does not permit UNWRA access. We think the UK must find alternative means to deliver aid. We believe this must done urgently with urgent deadlines, with or without Israeli support.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":198966,"created_at":"2024-11-04T08:27:03.849Z","updated_at":"2026-03-16T17:10:20.521Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-28T14:16:15.231Z","closed_at":"2025-07-28T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-04T20:15:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-26T14:10:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.448Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-25T07:00:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-24","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-25T10:25:44.805Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-08","summary":"The UK is funding aid, supporting air drops and evacuations, urging Israel to ease restrictions, and pressing for safe, large-scale UN-led aid delivery via land into Gaza.","details":"On 29 July, the IPC issued an alert warning that the worst-case scenario of famine is unfolding. The humanitarian situation is appalling – starvation, malnutrition and disease are driving hunger-related deaths. All routes to deliver humanitarian aid into Gaza are controlled by and must be approved by the Government of Israel. The UK has taken steps to alleviate the humanitarian situation through our advocacy and funding the humanitarian response, as well as supporting air drops and preparing for medical evacuations of children.\n\nIsrael has now agreed to impose 10-hour “tactical pauses” and ease restrictions on aid though we are yet to see a real change on the ground. However, the UK is pressing for permanent change to enable the UN and humanitarian partners (including NGOs) to deliver life-saving aid, safely and at-scale. The UN and humanitarian partners have the systems and expertise to deliver aid – they must be enabled to deliver aid safely and at-scale. Israel must work with the UN, and all partners to continue to facilitate a surge of aid into Gaza. Fully re-instating commercial deliveries will be key to sustaining the flow of aid.\n\nThe UK has also taken immediate steps to help alleviate the humanitarian situation, including air drops of humanitarian supplies along with Jordan and preparing to get injured children out of Gaza and into British hospitals. Throughout the conflict, the UK has collaborated with regional partners on alternative routes for aid to get into Gaza, including air drops and a maritime corridor. However, we are clear that these cannot substitute delivery by land, which remains the best way to get aid in at the scale required. This FY (25/26), the UK has announced £101m funding for the OPTs, including £60m for humanitarian assistance, £20m of which is for UNRWA.\n\nOn 21 July, the UK signed a joint statement with 31 partners that warned the suffering of Gazans had reached new depths, pressing for immediate lifting of restrictions on the flow of aid and calling for the UN and humanitarian NGOs to do their life-saving work safely and effectively. On 19 May, the UK signed a joint donor statement on the humanitarian situation in Gaza calling for a full resumption of aid and for Israel to allow the UN and other aid organisations to operate independently. \n\nForeign, Commonwealth & Development Office","created_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.445Z","updated_at":"2025-08-08T08:59:15.445Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-24","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-24/debates/8BB76C8A-F2FE-4705-9BB5-563E49C2D641/GazaHumanitarianObligations","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/h91WfAZi2tw?si=wK3jrLpFuNVmzPzr","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10235/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":713714,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/713714.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Increase funding for people with Parkinson’s and implement the \"Parky Charter\"","background":"We want the government to take the decisive five steps set out in the Movers and Shakers' \"Parky Charter\" and to fulfil the Health Secretary’s promises. ","additional_details":"As a priority, we want to make sure that everyone referred for a possible Parkinson’s diagnosis sees a consultant within 18 weeks and at least once a year after that.\r\n \r\nAs set out in the Parky Charter, we want:\r\n \r\n1. Speedy specialists\r\n2. Instant information\r\n3. Parkinson's passport\r\n4. Comprehensive care\r\n5. Quest for a cure\r\n \r\nParkinson’s is considered the fastest growing neurological condition in the world. We think it’s time for the government to respond to our grave concerns about what we consider systematic failings in Parkinson’s care.\r\n \r\nThe measures in the Parky Charter, which are supported by the three big Parkinson’s charities, require the government to deliver on their promises, ensuring timely diagnosis, comprehensive care, and dignity for all people with Parkinson’s.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":113439,"created_at":"2025-01-11T11:22:09.737Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T10:20:06.361Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-10T16:20:29.552Z","closed_at":"2025-09-10T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-13T12:25:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-13T10:31:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-04-03T15:07:19.723Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T18:12:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-10-24","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-17","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-18T10:20:06.361Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-04-29","summary":"The Government is committed to improving health outcomes for people with neurological conditions, including Parkinson’s disease. Funding provision is subject to Spending Review decisions.","details":"We acknowledge the challenges that neurology services have faced, particularly regarding workforce, delays to treatment and care, and a lack of information and support for patients. Nationally, there are initiatives supporting service improvement and better care for Parkinson’s patients, including the RightCare Progressive Neurological Conditions Toolkit and the Getting It Right First Time Neurology Programme. NHS England (NHSE) has established a Neurology Transformation Programme, which has developed a new model of integrated care to support integrated care boards to deliver the right service, at the right time for all neurology patients.\n\nWe have set up a UK-wide Neuro Forum, to bring together key stakeholders from across all four nations, to share learning, best practice examples and potential solutions.\n\nNHSE commissions the specialised elements of Parkinson’s care that patients may receive from 27 specialised neurology centres across England. Within specialised centres, multidisciplinary teams ensure patients can access a range of health professionals and specialised treatment, according to their needs.\n\nA central part of the 10-Year Health Plan will be our workforce and how we train and provide the staff the NHS needs to care for patients across our communities. This summer, we will publish a refreshed Long Term Workforce Plan aiming to treat patients on time again. We will ensure the NHS has the right people, in the right places, with the right skills to deliver the care patients need when they need it, including in neurology.\n\nIn January, NHSE published a new Elective Reform Plan, which sets out a whole system approach to hitting the 18-week referral to treatment target by 2029. We have achieved our pledge to deliver 2 million extra elective appointments. The additional appointments have taken place across a number of specialities, including neurology. We have made the commitment that 92% of patients will wait no longer than 18 weeks from referral to consultant-led treatment – in line with the NHS constitutional standard – by March 2029.\n\nNICE guidance recommends that people with Parkinson's should be seen at regular intervals of 6-12 months. While NICE guidance is not mandatory, we expect commissioners to take it fully into account when designing services for their local population.\n\nThe Government currently has no plans to increase specific funding for people with Parkinson’s. However, at the Autumn Budget, DHSC received a £22.6 billion increase in resource spending from 2023-24 to 2025-26. How this is spent will be determined according to clinical priorities.\n\nThere are no plans to add to the list of conditions that give entitlement to free prescriptions. Around 89% of prescription items are currently dispensed free of charge and a wide range of exemptions from prescription charges are in place. People with Parkinson’s who are 60 years old or over are entitled to free prescriptions. For those that pay for prescriptions, the cost can be capped by purchasing a pre-payment certificate. Also, the NHS Low Income Scheme can provide help with health costs on an income-related basis.\n\nThe Government recently brought forward a Green Paper on the health and disability benefits system and the support we offer, entitled Pathways to Work: Reforming Benefits and Support to Get Britain Working. Within that, we consider how to improve the system for those with very severe health conditions and disabilities, including exploring ways to reduce the need for some people with very severe health conditions to undergo a full Personal Independence Payment functional assessment.\n\nEligibility for a Blue Badge is not condition specific. Blue Badge eligibility criteria in England were extended in 2019 to include more people with non-visible disabilities, to ensure that people with the greatest needs, whatever their disability or condition, all have the same access to a badge.\n\nThe Government spent £79.06 million on Parkinson’s research from 2019-20 to 2023-24, with research delivered via UK Research and Innovation and the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR). We are continuing to invest in Parkinson’s research. For example, the UK Dementia Research Institute, primarily funded by Government, is partnering with Parkinson’s UK to establish a new £10 million research centre dedicated to better understanding the causes of Parkinson’s and finding new treatments. The NIHR welcomes high-quality funding applications for research into any aspect of human health, including Parkinson's. Applications are subject to peer review and judged in open competition, with awards being made on the basis of the importance of the topic to patients and health and care services, value for money and scientific quality. Welcoming applications on Parkinson’s disease to all NIHR programmes enables maximum flexibility in terms of the amount of research funding a particular area can be awarded, and the type of research which can be funded.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/713714)","created_at":"2025-04-03T15:07:19.720Z","updated_at":"2025-05-14T08:59:37.507Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-17","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-11-17/debates/81DDE476-39E4-431C-BD14-838C2AB3BB5F/Parkinson%E2%80%99SDisease","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JShKcoB1bqE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10394/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"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":728715,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728715.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review possible penalties for social media posts, including the use of prison","background":"We call on the Government to urgently review the possible penalties for non-violent offences arising from social media posts, including the use of prison. ","additional_details":"There is serious public concern about the proportionality of sentencing in cases involving opinion-based online speech. We believe imprisoning individuals for posts on social media sets a dangerous precedent and raises wider questions about freedom of expression, proportionality in sentencing, and the misuse of limited prison resources. We consider that alternative sanctions, such as fines or community service, would be more appropriate.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":191591,"created_at":"2025-05-27T18:05:08.578Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.084Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-20T12:02:52.796Z","closed_at":"2025-12-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-27T18:12:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-20T15:14:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-07T12:07:13.039Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-21T09:35:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-10-31","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-17","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-18T10:17:47.743Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-25","summary":"The government is committed to ensuring penalties are proportionate and uphold freedom of expression.","details":"Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of our democratic society. It is a long-standing tradition in this country that people are free to demonstrate their views, however uncomfortable these may be to the majority. The government is committed to protecting this right while also ensuring that laws are in place to address harmful, criminal behaviour.\n\nThe UK’s Online Safety Act 2023 (“the Act”) reflects this careful balance. It requires platforms to take proportionate steps to tackle illegal content and protect children from harmful material. At the same time, it has been designed to safeguard legal free speech, uphold privacy, and support innovation. The Act does not prevent adults from accessing legal content, nor does it restrict people from posting content that others may find offensive. It is not about individual posts. Instead, Ofcom will assess the systems and processes platforms have in place to manage risks and respond to harm. There are also protections against the over-removal of content, ensuring that lawful speech is not wrongly taken down.\n\nWhere an individual is convicted for an offence related to opinion-based online speech, the independent judiciary are responsible for determining appropriate sentences based on the facts of each case and the relevant sentencing guidelines.  The sentencing framework provides courts with a range of sentencing powers alongside imprisonment, including fines, community sentences, and suspended sentences. The law also makes clear that imprisonment should only be imposed where no other sentence would be appropriate.\n\nThe government commissioned a comprehensive review of sentencing powers through the Sentencing Review. This was a wide-ranging and evidence-led process that examined the full spectrum of sentencing options—from fines and community orders to custodial sentences—to ensure the framework is robust, proportionate, and fit for purpose.\n\nThe government has accepted the majority of the Review’s recommendations in principle and intends to legislate to implement them as soon as Parliamentary time allows. This includes targeted reforms to strengthen public protection and reduce reoffending.\n\nWe do not consider it necessary or appropriate to revisit the sentencing framework and we currently have no plans to review the penalties for these types of offences.\n\nWe are committed to ensuring that our justice system protects the public, upholds fundamental rights, and uses custodial sentences only where they are necessary and proportionate. \n\nMinistry of Justice\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728715)","created_at":"2025-07-07T12:07:13.037Z","updated_at":"2025-09-03T12:56:39.563Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-17","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-17/debates/336B2076-DEEC-4137-B2A1-2431F12C2A71/SocialMediaPostsPenaltiesForOffences","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP3uuuZGxvE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0214/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":702074,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702074.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Prohibit publishers irrevocably disabling video games they have already sold","background":"The government should update consumer law to prohibit publishers from disabling video games (and related game assets / features) they have already sold without recourse for customers to retain or repair them. We seek this as a statutory consumer right.","additional_details":"Most video games sold can work indefinitely, but some have design elements that render the product non-functional at a time which the publisher controls, with no date provided at sale. We see this as a form of planned obsolescence, as customers can be deprived of their purchase and cannot retain or repair the game. We think this practice is hostile to consumers, entirely preventable, and have concerns existing laws do not address the problem.  Thus, we believe government intervention is needed.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":189887,"created_at":"2024-11-17T19:01:47.912Z","updated_at":"2025-11-04T10:35:11.895Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-14T10:00:44.542Z","closed_at":"2025-07-14T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-18T16:22:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-18T10:50:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-03T15:09:54.335Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-02T15:50:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-11-03","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T10:35:11.895Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-03","summary":"There are no plans to amend UK consumer law on disabling video games. Those selling games must comply with existing requirements in consumer law and we will continue to monitor this issue.","details":"The Government recognises concerns raised by video games users regarding the operability of purchased products. As the lead department for video games, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) regularly engages industry representatives and monitors how consumers interact with games. We work with the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) as the lead department for consumer protection more generally.\n\nWe are aware of issues relating to the life-span of digital content, including video games, and we appreciate the concerns of players of some games that have been discontinued. We have no plans to amend existing consumer law on digital obsolescence, but we will monitor this issue and consider the relevant work of the Competition and Market Authority (CMA) on consumer rights and consumer detriment.\n\nVideo games sellers must comply with existing consumer law – this includes the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA) and Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs). We have provided details of relevant protections below. However, there is no requirement in UK law for software companies to support older versions of their products. Decision-making is for those companies, taking account of commercial and regulatory factors and complying with existing consumer law. There may be occasions where companies make decisions based on the high running costs of maintaining older servers for games with declining user bases. \n\nThe CRA gives consumers important rights when they make a contract with a trader for the supply of digital content, requiring it to be of satisfactory quality, fit for a particular purpose and as described by the seller. It may be difficult and expensive for businesses to maintain support for old software, particularly if it needs to interact with new technologies. However, if software is offered for sale that is not supported by the provider, then this should be made clear, for example on product webpages and physical packaging. \n\nIf digital content does not meet these quality rights, the consumer is entitled to a repair or replacement or, if not possible, some money back up to 100% of the cost of the digital content. These rights apply to intangible digital content like a PC game, as well as tangible content like a physical copy of a game. The CRA has a limit of up to six years after a breach of contract during which a consumer can take legal action.\n\nA trader or third party can upgrade and improve the features of digital content so long as it continues to match any description given by the trader and conforms with any pre-contract information provided by the trader, unless varied by express agreement. \n\nIn addition, the CRA requires that the terms and conditions applied by a trader to a product they sell must not be unfair and must be prominent and transparent. If not, they may also be challenged and the question of fairness is a matter for the courts. Terms found to be unfair are not binding on the consumer.\n\nThe CPRs require information to consumers to be clear and correct and prohibit commercial practices which through false information or misleading omissions cause the average consumer to make a different choice. As such, the regulations prohibit commercial practices which omit or hide information which the average consumer needs to make an informed choice, and prohibits traders from providing material information in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner. If consumers are led to believe that a game will remain playable indefinitely for certain systems, despite the end of physical support, the CPRs may require that the game remains technically feasible (for example, available offline) to play under those circumstances. \n\nThe CPRs are enforced by Trading Standards and the CMA. If consumers believe that there has been a breach of these regulations, they should report it to the Citizens Advice helpline (or Advice Direct Scotland for those living in Scotland) which is a free service advising on rights and how to take their case forward. The helplines will refer complaints to Trading Standards and CMA where appropriate. Consumers can also pursue private redress through the courts where a trader has provided misleading information on a product.\n\nThe CPRs section of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act 2024 is expected to come into effect in April 2025. It restates and updates the CPRs into primary legislation, revokes the 2008 regulations and sets out rules around unfair trading. The Act:\n● Provides the Secretary of State with the power to add, amend, or remove a description of a commercial practice which are in all circumstances considered unfair \n● Provides clarification that someone facilitating supply or promotion of a product is a ‘trader’ and must comply with consumer law\n\nThe use of this power will be kept under review – any amendments proposed are subject to a duty to consult with stakeholders and approval by both Houses of Parliament.\nDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2025-02-03T15:09:54.332Z","updated_at":"2025-02-03T15:11:52.599Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-11-04","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-11-03/debates/C603C07C-1BB5-41EF-A3C1-1AE1FEBBB95D/VideoGamesConsumerLaw","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/ONX2KUhyFow","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0195/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":715292,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/715292.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Raise statutory maternity/paternity pay to match the National Living Wage","background":"Statutory maternity and paternity pay is £4.99 per hour for a full-time worker on 37.5 hours per week - approximately 59% less than the 2024 National Living Wage of £12.21 per hour for workers aged 21+, which has been set out to ensure a basic standard of living. ","additional_details":"If the National Living Wage is £12.21 per hour to legally enforce and ensure a basic standard of living, why is statutory maternity or paternity pay just £4.99 per hour?\r\n\r\nWe feel that working parents, especially women, who contribute to the tax system are being pushed into poverty at their most vulnerable time. We believe this undermines family stability and suggests the Government does not prioritise childbirth or its economic value.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":107966,"created_at":"2025-01-24T05:28:06.375Z","updated_at":"2025-11-02T07:56:10.259Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-18T14:37:53.740Z","closed_at":"2025-09-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-24T08:30:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-09T08:50:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-04-25T14:45:44.288Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-03T16:49:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-27","debate_outcome_at":"2025-10-30T15:13:32.088Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-04-25","summary":"Parental pay entitlements are intended to provide a measure of financial security to parents to care for their child(ren).  However, they are not intended to replace earnings.","details":"The Government recognises the importance of parents having time away from work to care for a new child in their family. This is a key part of our plan to Make Work Pay, which aims to improve the quality and security of work. Parental leave and pay entitlements include Maternity, Paternity, Shared Parental and Neonatal Care Pay, as well as Adoption Leave and Pay, all of which are designed to support parents to take leave whilst retaining an attachment to the labour market so they can return to work when appropriate.\n\nMaternity pay is primarily a health and safety provision for pregnant working women, providing a measure of financial security during this important time.\n\nThere are two types of maternity pay available to pregnant working women: Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP), paid by employers and Maternity Allowance (MA), paid by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to eligible women (including the self-employed and women in employment who are not eligible for SMP). The qualifying conditions for both SMP and MA are 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\nPaternity Leave and Pay arrangements enable eligible employed fathers and partners to take up to two one-week blocks of leave, either consecutively or separately, during the first year following the birth of their child or placement for adoption. Paternity Pay is paid at the statutory rate.\n\nThe Government has set an aim to deliver a genuine living wage for every adult worker; the increase to the National Living Wage (NLW) to £12.21 is intended to make progress towards that. As this petition highlights, this payment is higher than the equivalent hourly rate of Maternity/Paternity Pay. However, Maternity and other types of Parental Pay are intended to provide a measure of financial security to support parents whilst they are away from the workplace; they are not a replacement of earnings and therefore 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 these payments were uprated in line with the Consumer Prices Index of 1.7 per cent, with their standard rates increasing from £184.03 to £187.18 per week. This means that the benefits retain their value against inflation.\n\nWhen considering calls to increase the level of parental benefits, the Government must balance a range of factors including the needs of parents, the impact on employers, and affordability for taxpayers. This is particularly true in today’s challenging economic climate. As such, any changes would need to be carefully considered, taking into account views from businesses and other stakeholders.\n\nThis petition has raised concerns that working parents, especially women (and by association, their child/children) are being pushed into poverty at their most vulnerable time. The Government recognises the financial pressures facing many pregnant women and new mothers and has measures in place to support them and their families. Maternity Pay is just one element of the support available. Indeed, depending on an individual’s circumstances, additional financial support, for example, Universal Credit, Child Benefit, and the Sure Start Maternity Grant (a lump sum payment of £500), may also be available. 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\nDelivering the manifesto commitment to tackle child poverty is an urgent priority for this Government, and we will bring forward a Child Poverty Strategy as soon as possible.\n\nIn addition, this Government is taking a mission-based approach to raise the healthiest generation of children ever and ensure that every child has a healthy, happy start to life. Giving children the best start in life means delivering accessible, integrated maternity, baby and family support services through the 1,001 days from conception to age two.\n\nThe Government also committed in the manifesto to review parental leave to ensure that it best supports working families. Planning is underway and further details of the review will be announced in due course.\n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions","created_at":"2025-04-25T14:45:44.285Z","updated_at":"2025-04-29T09:43:41.435Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-27/debates/5BF7BC8B-D0D1-4EED-9229-C4DA6945558B/StatutoryMaternityAndPaternityPay","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/fd1VHr2VfRE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0196/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DWP","name":"Department for Work and Pensions","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700047,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700047.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Allow parents to take their children out of school for up to 10 days fine free.","background":"We’re seeking reform to the punitive policy for term time leave that disproportionately impacts families that are already under immense pressure and criminalises parents that we think are making choices in the best interests of their families. No family should face criminal convictions!","additional_details":"The data that the DfE has published are statistics based on what we consider is a very weak correlation between school attendance and attainment, but they have failed entirely to consider causation. The SEND issues have also been ignored, and we believe some children are being discriminated against due to the strict guidelines that have been put in place. Many children with SEND do have a disability, and are therefore protected under the Equality Act. We are calling for reform of legislation on taking children out of school urgently.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":181597,"created_at":"2024-10-30T17:02:19.174Z","updated_at":"2025-10-30T15:16:09.458Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-28T17:41:25.108Z","closed_at":"2025-05-28T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-10-30T17:25:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-05T11:05:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2024-12-23T17:14:18.677Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-11T12:59:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-27","debate_outcome_at":"2025-10-30T15:11:14.478Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2024-12-23","summary":"We are determined to break down barriers to opportunity by supporting every child to achieve and thrive at school, working with parents and protecting children’s right to education.","details":"We sympathise with parents who, for a variety of reasons, face barriers to securing their children’s school attendance. This government is taking a new approach to tackling absence based on responsibility, partnership and belonging. This involves working with schools and local authorities to tackle barriers to school attendance and ensuring schools are able to deliver an excellent education, meeting children’s needs and creating a welcoming, engaging and inclusive environment for children. The government takes seriously its responsibility to ensure that schools are equipped to meet children’s needs and help them succeed, but that is matched by parents’ legal responsibility to send their children to school every day that they can.\n\nAbsence is one of the biggest barriers to success for children and young people, and has soared post-pandemic. It is one of the greatest barriers to opportunity and supporting children to achieve. The most recent DfE data shows that any increase in absence is associated with dramatic reductions in attainment – children who attend school every day are twice as likely to achieve good GCSEs compared to those who miss two weeks of school a year. It is not just those who are absent who are impacted. A steady churn of absences disrupts the learning of every child disrupting teachers’ ability to plan and sequence learning. It also has a significant detrimental impact on the hard work of school staff to cultivate a sense of community and belonging.\n\nWe know that some pupils face more complex barriers to attendance, including some pupils who have long term physical or mental health conditions or who have special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). Separately, we know that young people from disadvantaged backgrounds face a wide range of barriers to engagement with education, including insecure housing, uniform costs, travel costs and food. However, all of these children have the same need and right to a full-time education as any other pupil.\n\nThis is why this Government is determined to break down the barriers to opportunity, by ensuring school is the best place to be for every child. We will deliver free breakfast clubs in primary schools so that every child is on time and ready to learn, better mental health support through access to specialist mental health professionals in every school. This government is committed to improving inclusivity and expertise in mainstream schools, as well as ensuring special schools cater to children and young people with the most complex needs, restoring parents’ trust that their child will get the support they need. We have already announced over £1 billion of additional high needs funding for this year to help meet the needs of children with SEND and £740 million to create additional specialist places, including in mainstream schools. \n\nAll of this sits alongside our statutory ‘Working together to improve school attendance’ guidance, which recognises that the reasons for absence are varied and dependent on individual circumstances. It sets out that schools, trusts and local authorities should always work together with other local partners to understand and remove the barriers to attendance, including by having sensitive conversations with the pupil and their family. The guidance also reminds schools to consider their obligations under equality law when developing their attendance policies, and has an updated section on additional support for pupils with physical or mental ill health or SEND, including making formal reasonable adjustments where the pupil has a disability.\n\nHowever, where necessary, it is right that the law protects the child’s right to a full-time education. It is up to local authorities and schools to decide on the best course of action based on the circumstances of the individual case and what is most likely to improve attendance. It is important to emphasise that legal intervention cannot be used for absence that is recorded as authorised by the school (e.g. for illness or where a leave of absence has been granted). In addition, our new National Framework embeds our wider approach by including an expectation, for cases other than holiday, that support will have already been provided before a penalty notice is issued. Schools and local authorities are also expected to consider any obligations under the Equality Act 2010 when deciding whether to issue a penalty notice.\n\nOn holidays in particular, we understand that some parents wish to avoid peak periods. However, the school year is structured in such a way as to provide plenty of time throughout the year for holidays outside of term-time, and schools also have considerable flexibility to plan term dates themselves, and hold inset days and other occasional days at less busy times of the year.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2024-12-23T17:14:18.674Z","updated_at":"2024-12-30T11:17:57.777Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-27/debates/A5EB2274-327A-422C-B711-4646C9E59E27/HolidaysDuringSchoolTermTime","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/kJPKrvyed-I","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/holidays-during-school-term-time-england/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":718406,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718406.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Shut the migrant hotels down now and deport illegal migrants housed there","background":"The Labour Party pledged to end asylum hotels if it won power. Labour is now in power.\r\n","additional_details":"It has transpired that the migrant hotels may stay open for at least the next 4 years.\r\n \r\nWe want to see the migrant hotels shut down now and all illegal migrants housed in them deported immediately.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":257442,"created_at":"2025-02-19T01:07:42.455Z","updated_at":"2025-11-28T18:20:45.609Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-01T10:02:49.961Z","closed_at":"2025-10-01T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-19T05:06:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-07T09:36:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.598Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-28T21:28:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-20","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T11:34:04.351Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-04-23","summary":"We are working as fast as possible to close asylum hotels and increase the removal of people with no right to be in the UK, but we inherited an asylum system in chaos, and we cannot fix it overnight. ","details":"The Home Office has a statutory obligation to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be left destitute on our streets.\n\nBefore an individual can apply for that support, they are required to provide information about their personal circumstances which includes declaring all income, assets, and other forms of support available to them. Entitlement to support is kept under review, and failed asylum seekers are expected to leave the UK. \n\nBecause of the historically high number of individuals claiming asylum in the UK in recent years, there have been shortages in available asylum accommodation, and that required the previous government to start taking over hotels for that purpose.\n\nAt their peak, in Autumn 2023, more than 400 hotels were in use as asylum accommodation, at a cost of almost £9 million per day. That situation was also exacerbated towards the end of the last government when asylum decision-making fell into steep decline, and the asylum backlog rose accordingly.\n\nAs a result, the new Government inherited an asylum system under unprecedented strain, and due to the size of the backlog that has to be cleared, we have been forced to continue with the use of hotels for the time being, although it should be noted that the number in use now is lower than it was before the election and is around half the peak level that was reached in 2023.\n\nHowever, this Government is absolutely clear that hotel use is not a permanent solution, and we remain determined to end hotel usage entirely, as part of our objective to cut the costs of asylum accommodation.\n\nA key element of this is clearing the asylum backlog. Compared to the last few months of the previous government, when asylum decision making collapsed by more than 70%, we have spent the last nine months doing the opposite, increasing asylum decision making by 52% in the last three months of 2024 alone.\n\nAnother key element of ending hotel use is increasing the removal of people who have no right to be in the UK, including failed asylum seekers. After coming to power, this Government reallocated significant additional resource into immigration enforcement and returns, and again, that has delivered significant results.\n\nIn our first nine months in office, this Government has ensured the removal of more than 24,000 failed asylum seekers, foreign criminals and other immigration offenders with no right to be in the UK, an 11 per cent increase on the same period a year earlier, and a higher nine-month total than any achieved under the previous government after 2017. Of these returns, 6,781 were asylum-related returns, an increase of almost a quarter compared to the same period twelve months prior.\n\nWe will continue working hard to clear the asylum backlog, and remove people with no right to be in the UK, and over time, that will help us to achieve our commitment to end the use of hotels. We cannot achieve that overnight, because the scale of the challenge we inherited was too large, but we are determined to deliver on our pledge, and ensure that these unacceptably high costs are brought to an end.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.595Z","updated_at":"2025-04-23T15:01:49.595Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqocyL8XpV8","debate_pack_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":705383,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/705383.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop financial and other support for asylum seekers","background":"This petition is to advocate a cessation of financial and other support provided to asylum seekers by the Government. This support currently includes shelter, food, medical care (including optical and dental), and cash support.","additional_details":"I believe that such provisions may inadvertently incentivise illegal migration, particularly via the English Channel. \r\n \r\nThis petition is to urge the Government to discontinue these support measures and payments.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":427447,"created_at":"2024-11-27T11:30:36.204Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.104Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-01-20T16:07:53.467Z","closed_at":"2025-07-20T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-27T15:19:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-01T13:51:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.851Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-03T19:54:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-20","debate_outcome_at":"2025-11-04T11:33:09.681Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-23","summary":"We are determined to tackle illegal migration and end the use of asylum hotels but in the meantime there is a legal requirement to support asylum seekers who would otherwise be living on the streets.","details":"We are grateful to everyone who took the time to sign this petition. In response, we will first explain the background to the current situation, and then set out what the Government is doing about it.\n\nBackground:\n\nSince the 1950s, the UK has been legally obliged under the Refugee Convention to properly consider the claims of asylum-seekers arriving in our country. There is also a long-standing legal requirement to provide support to those asylum-seekers who would otherwise be left destitute on our streets.\n\nApplicants for support must provide details of their income and assets, so an assessment can be made of their risk of destitution. If they provide misleading information, break the rules of their accommodation, or do anything else to breach the conditions of their support, it can be suspended or withdrawn. \n\nWhen this Government came to office last July, it inherited an asylum system under unprecedented strain, with tens of thousands of cases waiting to be considered, and asylum hotels being used across the country to house the asylum-seekers caught in that backlog. At their peak in autumn 2023, they had 400 hotels in use, at a cost of almost £9 million per day.\n\nOur Plan for Change:\n\nAs part of the Government’s Plan for Change, we are restoring order to the asylum system by clearing the backlog, ending the use of hotels, and increasing the removal of individuals with no right to be in the UK.\n\nFirst, on clearing the asylum backlog, we have significantly increased the numbers of cases being processed each month. In the last full quarter, from January to March 2025, the second highest number of initial decisions was taken since records began in 2002, more than double the number taken in the three months before the election.\n\nSecond, on the use of asylum hotels, we will reach the point this summer where the number of hotels in use will have halved from its peak under the last government, and our commitment remains to end their use entirely by the end of this Parliament. As a result of the action we have taken already, £500 million has been cut from the annual cost of asylum hotels. \n\nThird, on removing people with no right to be here, our new enforcement programme put almost 30,000 people on flights out of the UK up to 18th May, including the four biggest returns charter flights in our country’s history. That includes 8,511 former asylum cases, an increase of almost a quarter compared to the same period twelve months earlier. \n\nWe will continue to take action in all three areas above, so that the cost of providing support to asylum-seekers is reduced by as much as possible as quickly as possible. However, we cannot end this problem entirely overnight. There are still tens of thousands of people in the backlog, and even though we are working as fast as we can to process their cases, there is still a legal requirement to provide many of them with support in the interim. \n\nThe petition’s proposals:\n\nThe petition proposes ending that support immediately, and while we understand the objective behind that proposal, we have to recognise that – in many cases – the people currently receiving that support would end up living on the street instead, including many women and children. According to the latest official data, the number of rough sleepers in England in autumn 2024 \nwas 4,667, so if we immediately ended the support given to every asylum-seeker, it would increase that number by multiple amounts.\n\nWe believe a better approach is to continue speeding up the processing of asylum claims, so that people who are genuine refugees can be accepted, those who are not can be rejected and removed, and either way, we can keep working to cut the amount of money spent on asylum support. In addition, we will continue taking strong action to reduce the number of people entering the UK asylum system in the first place:\n\n• Through the work of our Border Security Command and the new counter-terror style powers in our Border Security Bill, we are doing what should have been done many years ago, and going after the organised criminal gangs who make millions bringing people across the Channel in small boats. We have also agreed with the French authorities that – for the first time – they will start intercepting those boats in the shallow waters off the French coast, and taking the passengers back to shore, something which their internal rules have previously prevented them doing; and\n\n• In our Immigration White Paper, we have not only set out plans to reduce net migration substantially from the record levels reached under the last government, we have also announced new proposals to crack down on abuse of the asylum system, in particular to prevent people coming here on student and work visas, and then claiming asylum at the end of their stay. For too long, the previous government turned a blind eye to those abuses and let the system run out of control, but this Government is determined to restore order to the system, and save the taxpayer money. \n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.848Z","updated_at":"2025-06-24T10:24:00.848Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-20/debates/5B57404B-1EB6-4652-93C9-26B8F084AEFA/AsylumSeekersSupportAndAccommodation","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqocyL8XpV8","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0184/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":700317,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700317.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End the Badger cull and adopt other approaches to bovine TB control","background":"The Government’s TB Eradication Strategy allows the continued killing of badgers, a protected species, until the end of this Parliament, despite the Labour manifesto calling the cull “ineffective.”\r\n\r\nWe believe the badger cull is unjustified and must end.","additional_details":"Some research has suggested culling results in a reduction in bovine TB (bTB) in cattle. However, there are concerns about the methodology used. Other research, which has been peer reviewed and published, shows no evidence that culling badgers reduces confirmed bTB in cattle. Over 230,000 badgers — many healthy — have been killed, disrupting ecosystems without solid scientific justification.\r\n\r\nWe call for an immediate end to the cull and the implementation of cattle focused measures to control bTB, rather than what we see as scapegoating wildlife.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":102458,"created_at":"2024-11-01T16:28:12.166Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T10:09:23.381Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-11-28T16:23:10.721Z","closed_at":"2025-05-28T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-01T20:34:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-29T12:46:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-01-10T14:43:18.894Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-11T20:57:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-09-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-10-13","debate_outcome_at":"2025-10-14T09:13:28.429Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-01-10","summary":"Bovine TB has devastated British farmers and wildlife. Work has started on a new eradication strategy to drive down TB rates, protecting cattle and farmers’ livelihoods, and to end the badger cull.","details":"Bovine tuberculosis (TB) has had a devastating impact on British livestock and wildlife. Over the past decade alone, 278,000 cattle have been compulsorily slaughtered and over 230,000 badgers have been killed in efforts to control the disease. \n\nOn 30 August, the government announced the start of work on a comprehensive new strategy to continue to drive down bovine TB rates to save cattle and farmers’ livelihoods and end the badger cull by the end of this parliament. \n\nWorking closely alongside farmers, vets, scientists and conservationists to rapidly strengthen and deploy a range of disease control measures, a key part of the strategy remains the ongoing development of a cattle vaccine, which is at the forefront of innovative solutions to help eradicate this disease.  \n\nField trials of the candidate CattleBCG vaccine and companion test to “Detect Infected among Vaccinated Animals” (the so-called DIVA skin test) started in June 2021 and are on-going. The aim of these trials is to gather further information on the vaccine and the test to support marketing authorisation applications and international recognition. Our aim is to deliver an effective cattle TB vaccination strategy within the next few years to accelerate progress towards achieving Officially Bovine Tuberculosis Free status for England by 2038. \n\nThe work towards a new strategy marks a step-change in approach to tackling this devastating disease. It will consider how we boost cattle testing, reduce the spread of disease through cattle movements, and deploy badger vaccination on a wider, landscape scale. This will build on the independent review of the bovine TB strategy led by Professor Sir Charles Godfray in 2018. \n\nExisting cull processes will be honoured to ensure clarity for farmers involved in these culls whilst new measures can be rolled out. However, the government has decided that it will not be proceeding with the proposals drawn up under the previous government relating to targeted badger culling. That follows careful consideration of the responses received to the public consultation launched earlier this year.\n\nWork to underpin the next phase of policy with robust science has already begun and includes:    \n\n• The first badger population survey in over a decade, to start this winter, to estimate badger abundance and population recovery. \n\n• The development of a new national wildlife TB surveillance programme to provide an up-to-date understanding of disease in badgers and other wildlife such as deer, unlocking a data-driven approach to inform how and where TB vaccines and other eradication measures are deployed. \n\n• Establishment of a new Badger Vaccinator Field Force to increase badger vaccination delivery at pace and create progressively healthier badger populations that are less susceptible to catching and transmitting TB.  \n\n• A badger vaccination study to rapidly analyse the effect of badger vaccination on the incidence of TB in cattle, which in turn will encourage farmers to take part and provide greater confidence that doing so will have a positive effect on their cattle.   \n\nThe strategy announcement ensures the government meets its manifesto commitment and represents a new direction in defeating this disease that will both protect the farming community and preserve wildlife. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-01-10T14:43:18.890Z","updated_at":"2025-01-10T14:43:18.890Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-10-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-10-13/debates/29C3A9F2-021F-4675-BDA1-F7710613DB9A/BovineTuberculosisControlAndBadgerCulling","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/n4cjB_CMl4U?si=FoSJxmweFxItCQaQ","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0189/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/TB-badger-cull/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":711021,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/711021.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Retain legal right to assessment and support in education for children with SEND","background":"Support in education is a vital legal right of children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). We ask the government to commit to maintaining the existing law, so that vulnerable children with SEND can access education and achieve their potential.","additional_details":"It has been reported that the government is considering making changes to The Children and Families Act 2014, which sets out the legal rights to assessment and statutory support in education for disabled children. We believe that these rights do not only help vulnerable children and their families - they also reduce costs to the state in adulthood. We think that removing statutory obligations on local authorities could mean many children do not get the support they need to reach their potential.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":132789,"created_at":"2024-12-22T17:55:09.795Z","updated_at":"2025-10-15T11:27:42.401Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-09T13:48:17.393Z","closed_at":"2025-10-09T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-12-22T18:30:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-18T20:13:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-04T14:48:16.778Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-11T20:55:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-07-28","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-09-15","debate_outcome_at":"2025-10-15T11:27:42.401Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-05","summary":"There will always be a legal right to additional support for children with SEND. No decisions have been made on changes to legislation. We are engaging with families on improvements to SEND provision.","details":"As part of our Plan for Change, we are determined to improve the system of support for children with SEND and their families. We are working to restore families’ trust by ensuring early years, schools and post-16 settings have the tools to better identify and meet need earlier and ensure more children and young people can receive their education in inclusive mainstream settings with their peers.\n\nWe are committed to:\n\n• ensuring a legal right to additional support for children and young people with SEND;\n• ensuring all children and young people have the support they need to achieve and thrive;\n• improving inclusivity and expertise in mainstream schools, as well as ensuring swift access to special schools for children and young people with the most complex needs; and\n• restoring confidence in the system of support for children and young people with SEND so that they all get the chance to achieve and thrive in their education.    \n\nAny changes we make will improve support for families, stop parents from having to fight for support, and protect effective support currently in place. \n\nDetails of the government's intended approach to strengthening the SEND system will be set out in a Schools White Paper in the autumn. \n\nAs part of developing our approach, we are working with parents and young people, organisations which represent parents, local authorities, SEND organisations and education settings across the country, as well as sector experts. \n\nWe share the widespread view that improvements to the SEND system are badly needed. The forthcoming consultation on the White Paper will be key to shaping the reforms to the SEND system, so that every child and young person can achieve and thrive and we continue to break down barriers to opportunity.\n\nDepartment for Education\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/711021)","created_at":"2025-06-04T14:48:16.776Z","updated_at":"2025-09-03T13:55:46.761Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-09-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-09-15/debates/E7A26973-7F7B-41E0-8A02-689BEA99F336/ChildrenWithSENDAssessmentsAndSupport","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5TymDgNxR8","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07020/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727356,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727356.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep 5-year ILR terms to Hong Kong British National (Overseas) visas","background":"We urge the Government to exempt BN(O) visa for Hongkongers from the proposed immigration reforms. We think the current ILR terms must remain unchanged:\r\n \r\n1. Five years of UK residency\r\n2. B1 level English proficiency\r\n3. Passing the Life in the UK Test\r\n","additional_details":"Many Hongkongers on the BN(O) visa, including retired seniors, have started a new life in the UK after the imposition of the National Security Law. They followed the rules with the understanding that after five years, they could settle permanently if they met the English and civic knowledge requirements. We think changing these terms would break the UK's promises and cause stress and uncertainty for those who trusted in this humanitarian route. We urge the Government to honour its original commitment.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":114605,"created_at":"2025-05-12T14:38:59.382Z","updated_at":"2025-12-26T00:00:19.784Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-25T09:49:33.469Z","closed_at":"2025-12-25T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T17:40:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-26T07:41:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-11T07:55:20.235Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-04T21:46:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-07-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-09-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-09-09T09:44:32.234Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-11","summary":"We are firmly committed to the existing Hong Kong community in the UK and all those who will arrive in future. Further details of measures in the Immigration White Paper will be set out in due course.","details":"Settlement in the UK is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. Settlement is also an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nAs stated in the Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May, we therefore intend to reform the current rules around settlement so that individuals must earn their right to that privileged immigration status in the UK through the long-term contribution they bring to our country. It is also important that those coming to the UK are able to integrate into society. English language requirements along with the Life in the UK test are essential in supporting that integration.\n\nThe reforms to earned settlement set out in the White Paper will be set out in detail later this year, and there will be an opportunity for everyone to contribute to the consultation on those changes. We recognise how important this issue is to the Hong Kong community, and we will listen carefully to what they tell us in that consultation before taking any final decisions on how the new rules will operate, which immigration routes they will affect, and when the changes will take effect. In the meantime, the current rules for settlement under the BN(O) route will continue to apply. \n\nThe detail of the new English Language requirements in relation to specific routes will be set out in due course when changes to the Immigration Rules introducing the new requirements are brought forward, as well as any further details about changes to the Life in the UK Test. Again, we will take all views submitted to the Home Office by the Hong Kong community into account as part of that process.\n\nWe thank the petitioners for sharing their views ahead of the consultation and look forward to hearing from them again once they have had the chance to review the final proposals in detail. We will also continue to engage regularly with representatives of the Hong Kong diaspora in the UK on any other issues related to the BN(O) visa as part of our ongoing commitment to support that community.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-07-11T07:55:20.233Z","updated_at":"2025-07-11T07:55:50.508Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-09-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-09-08/debates/25EC2767-BBFF-4FE8-8F52-65B2C28CED10/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/sGBlfyO5VhI?si=qz7pcnWmcaYyv4CI","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0172/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727360,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727360.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep the 5-Year ILR pathway for existing Skilled Worker visa holders","background":"Do not apply the proposed 10-year ILR rule to existing Skilled Worker visa holders. Keep the 5-year ILR route for those already in the UK on this visa. Apply any changes only to new applicants from the date of implementation.","additional_details":"Many skilled visa holders moved to the UK for better opportunities and in return have contributed to the UK economy, paid taxes, and supported critical sectors like health, care, and engineering. We think that changing ILR rules mid-journey is unfair and causes stress for families. Apply the 10-year rule only to future Skilled Worker entrants, not those already building a life here under the current system.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":188125,"created_at":"2025-05-12T16:07:54.265Z","updated_at":"2025-12-12T16:34:17.043Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-23T11:09:16.240Z","closed_at":"2025-11-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T16:17:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-23T16:12:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.149Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-25T13:21:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-07-18","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-09-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-09-09T09:43:08.564Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-06-17","summary":"As with several other measures in the Immigration White Paper, the proposals on earned settlement will be subject to a formal consultation process, and we welcome this contribution to that process.","details":"The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, includes proposals for Earned Settlement.\n\nSettlement in the UK is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. Settlement is also an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nThere were 162,000 grants of settlement in 2024, up 35% from 2023. This rise reflects the increase in individuals coming to the UK between 2015 and 2019 on entry clearance visas who have since become eligible for settlement and citizenship. As things stand, more people are likely to become eligible for settlement and then citizenship over the next few years as a result of the extremely high level of net migration between 2019 and 2024.\n\nThe share of people who go on to claim settlement varies considerably by the type of visa people were initially granted to enter the UK, 18% of those coming on work visas between 2010 and 2018 secured settlement by 2023, compared to 75% on the Family route.\n\nIt has been a long-standing principle that settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. Under the current system settlement is primarily qualified for on the basis of length of time spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\n\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in our country and they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\n\nWe therefore intend to reform our settlement rules by expanding the Points-Based System and increasing the standard qualifying period for settlement to ten years. \n\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\n\nWe will continue to offer a shorter pathway to settlement for non-UK dependants of British citizens to five years, who have remained compliant with their requirements, and we will retain existing safeguards to protect the vulnerable, including settlement rights for victims of domestic violence and abuse.\n\nWe will consult on the details of the proposed policy changes later this year, including any proposed transitional arrangements for those already in the UK. These are important changes. We recognise how important this issue is to people, and we will listen carefully to what they tell us in that consultation. \n\nWe are grateful to the petitioners for setting out their views on this announcement ahead of that consultation process, and we look forward to hearing from them again when they have had the opportunity to study the final proposals in detail.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.141Z","updated_at":"2025-06-17T08:04:22.141Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-09-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-09-08/debates/25EC2767-BBFF-4FE8-8F52-65B2C28CED10/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/sGBlfyO5VhI?si=qz7pcnWmcaYyv4CI","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0172/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}}]}