{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2&state=with_response","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=with_response","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=15&state=with_response","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=3&state=with_response","prev":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=with_response"},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":757849,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/757849.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Government ban on social media to be for under 13s only","background":"Any government ban on social media that is introduced should be for under 13s only. We want people 13+ to be able to use social media. Not just 16+, as we believe 13 is reasonable as you are officially a teen and responsible for yourself.","additional_details":"We want this to happen as many teens in the UK will be affected by the ban and we believe the proposed age limit for the ban is too high and want to lower it to apply to under 13s only.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":15238,"closing_date":"2026-08-19","created_at":"2026-01-20T08:04:54.339Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T12:43:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-19T16:38:47.103Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-20T08:27:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-17T20:23:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-07-02T17:17:48.216Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Robyn Rachel Shephard","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-02","summary":"Having listened to parents, children and experts, we are restricting social media companies from offering services to under-16s while supporting safe, positive online and offline spaces for children.","details":"The government would like to thank all those who signed the e-petition on this important issue.\n\nEvery child deserves a childhood shaped by friendships, curiosity, play and love. A childhood where they feel safe, supported, and free to explore who they are. Where they can try new things, build confidence, make friends and feel they belong. That is the childhood every parent and carer wants for their child. It is the childhood every child deserves. Technology can be part of that - but for too long, the balance has been wrong.\n\nThat is why the government launched our consultation on growing up in the online world. More than 116,000 people responded - 54,000 parents, 14,000 children, charities, teachers' organisations, medical professionals, the police, industry, academia and parliamentarians.  Nine out of ten parents who responded to the consultation agreed with social media platforms being restricted from offering their services to under-16s. Two thirds of children who responded to the consultation told us that they would support age restrictions for under 16s on at least some social media.\n\nWhat we heard through our consultation is that social media is causing real harm and up and down the country.  It is affecting children's mental health, their sleep, their concentration and their self-esteem. In the absolute worst cases, it is exposing them to self-harm, grooming, exploitation and abuse.\n\nWe have heard the views of those, including the signatories of this e-petition, who believe the right age should be 13 rather than 16. We recognise that for many teenagers, social media is a key part of how they stay in touch with friends, share interests and feel part of a wider community, and that 13 has historically been the minimum age used by many platforms themselves. As part of the consultation, respondents were asked whether they would support setting a minimum age of access for social media services and whether they supported a minimum age of 16, as well as some alternative ages. Of the 21,828 responses to this set of questions only 1,131 (5%) selected 13, while the majority supported 16 specifically.\n\nMoreover, following discussions and correspondence with parents, children, and professionals working with children, it is clear that the harms do not stop at 13.\n\nThe government has listened and we are acting. We will restrict social media companies from offering their services to under-16s. We will restrict some harmful functionalities - including livestreaming and stranger communication - across a wider range of services, including gaming platforms for under 16s. We will also require AI chatbots to prevent children under 18 from accessing features that are specifically designed to enable sexually explicit interaction.\n\nThe government recognises that this change will be difficult for children who are already accustomed to social media being part of their daily lives, including teenagers aged 13 and over. However, children under 16 will still be able to benefit from safe and positive online spaces. They will continue to have access to the internet, age appropriate online spaces, gaming services, and messaging with family and friends.  Some services may choose to redesign themselves to be compliant with the new laws and government has been clear that it would welcome more bespoke online offerings for under 16s.\n\nAlongside this, the government is clear that childhood should be shaped as much by what happens offline as by what happens online. That is why, and alongside these protections, the government is working across departments to expand access to educational and enriching opportunities. This includes sport, music, the arts, volunteering, clubs and other activities that enable children to develop their interests, form lasting friendships and build a stronger sense of belonging. We are also providing parents with the support they have long called for.\n\nThis is not the end of the government's work in this area. Further measures will be brought forward in July, and as technology continues to evolve, the government remains prepared to take additional action where necessary. The protections outlined above mark a bold and significant step towards delivering a safer and healthier online environment for children and for the generations to come.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2026-07-02T17:17:48.213Z","updated_at":"2026-07-02T17:17:48.213Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":768395,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/768395.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make carbon monoxide alarms mandatory in all holiday accommodation","background":"We ask the UK Government to introduce legislation requiring all holiday accommodation, including short-term lets and rentals, to install and maintain working carbon monoxide alarms, with mandatory regular safety checks and proper enforcement.","additional_details":"This petition is written by a mother whose heart has been broken forever. My daughter and her boyfriend died from carbon monoxide poisoning whilst on holiday in Bridlington. Carbon monoxide is a silent, preventable killer. No family should go away and not come home. Stronger laws are needed to ensure all holiday accommodation has working carbon monoxide alarms to prevent further devastating loss.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":23127,"closing_date":"2026-11-27","created_at":"2026-04-26T16:56:22.970Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:24:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-27T14:53:34.279Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-26T17:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-11T21:45:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.399Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Devon Andrews","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-02","summary":"The Government supports carbon monoxide safety through existing regulation; we will engage with regulators and across government departments to consider whether additional measures are needed.","details":"Carbon monoxide is a poisonous gas that cannot be seen, smelt or tasted. We are very sorry to hear of your loss and offer our deepest condolences to you and all those affected. The Government recognises the devastating impact of carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning and is committed to protecting people from its risks through a range of regulatory measures.\n\nStatutory guidance in Approved Document J of the Building Regulations sets out provision for carbon monoxide alarms where certain new or replacement fixed combustion appliances are installed in dwellings. These requirements apply regardless of whether a property is a main residence, second home, short-term let or holiday accommodation. The requirements were strengthened in 2022 to cover new or replacement fixed combustion appliances of any fuel type, other than gas cookers. Approved Document J can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/combustion-appliances-and-fuel-storage-systems-approved-document-j\n\nThe Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarm (England) Regulations 2015 require private and social landlords to install carbon monoxide alarms in rooms used as living accommodation that contain a fixed combustion appliance, other than a gas cooker. These regulations can apply to holiday accommodation covered by a tenancy, but do not generally apply to holiday accommodation occupied under a licence. These regulations can be found at https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2015/9780111133439/contents\n\nCarbon monoxide safety is supported by wider legislation. The Gas Safety (Installation and Use) Regulations 1998 require gas appliances, fittings and flues to be installed and maintained safely, and can be found at  https://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l56.htm\n\nThe Health and Safety Executive advises that proper installation, servicing and maintenance of appliances are among the most effective ways of reducing the risk of carbon monoxide poisoning. The Health and Safety Executive provides advice on Gas safety for landlords and letting agents. This advice can be found at https://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/domestic/faqlandlord.htm\n\nThe Government also publishes fire safety guidance for small premises providing accommodation for paying guests, including holiday caravans, lodges and similar accommodation. This recommends carbon monoxide detectors where living accommodation contains a gas or solid fuel-burning appliance. The guidance can be found at  https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-your-small-paying-guest-accommodation-safe-from-fire/making-your-small-paying-guest-accommodation-safe-from-fire-accessible\n\nWe recognise that some types of holiday accommodation, including caravans, park homes and similar mobile structures fall outside the scope of the Building Regulations regime for which the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government is responsible. We will therefore engage with other government departments and regulators to enable government to consider the best way for this to be addressed.\n\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.396Z","updated_at":"2026-07-02T11:23:10.396Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MHCLG","name":"Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housing-communities-local-government"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":761192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/761192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop taxing Longer Separation Allowance on British armed forces","background":"We want the Government to stop taxing Longer Separation Allowance (LSA) which compensates British service personnel for unavoidable extended time away from their families due to deployments and training.  ","additional_details":"LSA also helps ease the emotional, personal, and financial strain these separations place on soldiers and their loved ones.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":22106,"closing_date":"2026-10-09","created_at":"2026-02-15T18:46:29.126Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:45:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-09T15:14:16.064Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-15T18:54:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-06T16:57:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-30T14:27:05.956Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Kieran mcvitie","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-30","summary":"The Longer Separation Allowance recognises the impact of time away from home. It is taxed like salary under UK tax law, and there are currently no plans to change this.","details":"We recognise the significant impact that time away from home can have on Service personnel and their families.\n\nThe Longer Separation Allowance is paid to Service personnel who are required to live or work away from their families for extended periods, such as on longer exercises or operational deployments. It is part of the overall military pay and allowances package, designed to reflect the unique demands placed on Service personnel. The allowance helps compensate for time spent away from home, over and above what is expected as part of normal Service life, for which Service personnel already receive an additional element of pay known as X‑Factor. Payments increase with the amount of separation experienced, so those who spend longer periods away from home receive higher levels of support.\n\nThe Longer Separation Allowance is treated as earnings, similar to salary, and is therefore taxed in the same way under the UK tax system. This approach is set out in tax legislation, which determines how different types of income are treated for tax purposes.\n\nThe Armed Forces’ Pay Review Body independently reviews military pay and allowances, including the Longer Separation Allowance, to ensure they remain fair, appropriate and support recruitment and retention. However, decisions on how income is taxed are made separately through wider Government tax policy and legislation. This ensures they remain aligned with the demands of Service life and continue to support recruitment and retention.\n\nThe Government keeps the tax system under review, but there are currently no plans to change the tax treatment of Longer Separation Allowance. This provides consistency in how different forms of income are treated across the tax system.\n\nMinistry of Defence","created_at":"2026-06-30T14:27:05.951Z","updated_at":"2026-06-30T14:27:05.951Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":751480,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/751480.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not remove trial by jury for certain cases","background":"The MoJ plans to remove the right to trial by jury for either-way cases with a likely sentence of three years or less. We believe it is an ancient right allowing us to be judged by our peers and this right must never be lost.","additional_details":"The Magna Carta (1215) states:\r\n\r\n“No free man shall be taken or imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land”.\r\n\r\nWe believe that losing this right would be to break British Justice completely.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10478,"created_at":"2025-11-22T09:34:21.506Z","updated_at":"2026-06-30T08:08:57.593Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-18T16:00:11.351Z","closed_at":"2026-06-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-22T16:10:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-14T20:38:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-30T08:08:29.873Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-29","summary":"More than 90% of criminal cases are already dealt with – fairly – in magistrates’ courts, without a jury. Under the government’s reforms, the most serious cases will continue to be heard by a jury.","details":"Trial by jury is a long-standing and fundamental part of the criminal justice system in England and Wales, and the Government recognises the strength of feeling on this issue. Trial by jury will always be available for the most serious offences.\n\nHowever, as Sir Brian Leveson highlighted in his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, “no right to jury can be derived from Magna Carta” - there is no right to a jury trial in the English and Welsh statute books, only the right to a fair trial.\n\nArticle 40 of Magna Carta states that we must not “deny or delay right or justice.”  The latest figures show that over 22,000 open cases in the Crown Court have been waiting a year or more. Behind the numbers are people waiting for justice – victims putting their lives on hold waiting for their case to come to trial, witnesses waiting to give evidence, and defendants, sometimes stuck on remand, seeking to clear their name.\n\nTimeliness is an essential ingredient of fairness, and the fairness of the system is undermined by delays in the Crown Court. That is why this Government asked Sir Brian Leveson to make recommendations on how to modernise the system, ensure the courts can keep up with incoming demand and reduce the existing backlog of cases, and restore stability and confidence in the criminal courts.\n\nTrial by jury is already reserved for the most serious offences - 3% of all criminal trial cases are currently heard by a jury. Less serious cases are effectively handled in the magistrates’ courts, where more than 90% of criminal cases are already dealt with – fairly – without a jury.\n\nThis approach reflects the principle that a jury trial is not always appropriate or proportionate for every case. The threshold for what offences should be heard by jury has always changed over time. For example, drink-driving offences were once heard by a jury but today, these cases are routinely dealt with in the magistrates’ courts without a jury. Our reforms do not seek to abolish jury trials. They seek to ensure that trial by jury is available for the cases where they are most appropriate, while improving the efficiency of all trial routes so cases progress more quickly through the courts.\n\nCriminal cases now are increasingly complex due to new forms of evidence such as digital evidence from mobile phones and computers, and DNA analysis, which has significantly increased the time and resources required for criminal trials, creating a demand on the system that exceeds available capacity.\n\nThe reforms being introduced in the Courts and Tribunals Bill are intended to modernise and improve the system, to build a criminal courts system that is resilient, flexible, better equipped to manage the types and characteristics of today’s crimes and to enable a more proportionate allocation of resources across the criminal courts. This includes adjusting the threshold for jury trial and ensuring proportionate alternative trial routes are available for suitable offences. This aims to rebalance victims’ and defendants’ rights, create a sustainable system that delivers swifter justice for all, and preserve timely jury trials for the most serious cases. The reforms are also intended to restore balance between the defendant and claimant, enabling the court to determine the mode of trial rather than defendants.  \n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2026-06-30T08:08:29.870Z","updated_at":"2026-06-30T08:08:52.737Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":767644,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/767644.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make seizure training mandatory in all child and vulnerable adult work settings","background":"Our family have been through a lot due to epilepsy. We want the government to change the law so that anyone working in a child or vulnerable adult care setting goes through seizure training as part of their training, before starting the job.","additional_details":"Currently there is no requirement for all staff to receive seizure‑specific training and many settings provide little or no training. We are concerned that this puts children and adults who suffer from seizures at risk. Seizures can be extremely dangerous. Simple training at the start of a new job could save lives. We are asking for this to be mandatory for all nursery, school and care setting staff.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":11769,"closing_date":"2026-11-14","created_at":"2026-04-18T13:01:22.299Z","updated_at":"2026-08-15T21:52:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-14T16:13:17.271Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-18T13:13:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-06T07:04:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-30T08:00:05.042Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Gillian Cardwell","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-29","summary":"The Government supports staff training, including skills to respond to seizures. Child and vulnerable adult settings must ensure their staff are trained to meet the needs of the people they support.","details":"The Government recognises the importance of children and vulnerable adults who experience seizures receiving care and support that is safe, responsive and tailored to their individual needs. \n\nEnhancing the skills of staff working in adult social care is vital to ensuring that care provided is good quality and personalised to an individual. This includes equipping staff with the skills and confidence to support people who may experience seizures. \n\nThe Department of Health and Social Care launched the Adult Social Care Learning and Development Support Scheme in September 2024, providing funding for eligible care staff to complete training courses and qualifications, including the Level 2 Adult Social Care Certificate.  \n\nThe Level 2 Adult Social Care Certificate includes training on areas such as health and safety, basic life support, medication management, and recognising changes in an individual’s condition. These core competencies help care workers to identify and respond appropriately to a wide range of health needs, including seizure activity, and to take action where necessary. In addition to the Level 2 certificate, the Learning and Development Support Scheme also provides funding for more specialist training, including the Level 3 Award in Epilepsy and the Administration of Buccal Midazolam, supporting staff to develop the skills needed to respond safely and effectively to more complex conditions. \n\nThe Care Workforce Pathway sets out the knowledge, skills, values and behaviours expected across adult social care roles, and is supported by the Care Certificate standards, which define the baseline training expected for staff who are new to care. The Level 2 Adult Social Care Certificate builds on these standards and provides a recognised qualification aligned to the “new to care” role category in the Pathway, establishing the core knowledge that staff should have at the start of their careers.\n\nThe Government will continue to support a person-centred approach to adult social care, underpinned by a skilled workforce able to deliver tailored and responsive care focused on the needs of an individual.\n\nImproving the support for children and young people with medical conditions is also a key priority for the Government. Staff training should be suitable to the role and level of responsibility expected of staff. The Department for Education recently consulted on revised statutory guidance on Supporting children and young people with medical conditions and allergy (https://consult.education.gov.uk/medical-conditions-at-school/medical-conditions-at-school-statutory-guidance/supporting_documents/supporting-children-and-young-people-with-medical-conditions-and-allergypdf) which will reinforce the expectation in our current statutory guidance (Supporting pupils with medical conditions at school - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/supporting-pupils-at-school-with-medical-conditions--3) that staff in schools, colleges and early years settings should have training and awareness of medical conditions and know how to respond in an emergency. We are considering the responses to the consultation and will respond and publish the revised guidance in due course.\n\nProvision of continuous professional development for employed social workers is a matter for their employer. The regulator for the social work profession, Social Work England, sets the professional standards which all social workers must meet. Social workers complete initial education and training courses which are approved by the regulator against the education and training standards. Course providers must update and design their courses as a result of developments in research, legislation, government policy and best practice.\n\nChildren’s homes providers must ensure that staff have the relevant skills and knowledge to be able to respond to the individual health needs of children, including those arising from chronic conditions or other complex needs. At least one person on duty at any given time in a children’s home must have a suitable first aid qualification. We are undertaking a review of professional development (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-professional-development-for-the-childrens-homes-workforce-terms-of-reference) to ensure staff have the right skills, qualifications and training. Supported accommodation providers must ensure young people receive appropriate support and staff understand the health needs of young people, including responding to specific conditions in line with care or support plans.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-06-30T08:00:05.035Z","updated_at":"2026-06-30T08:03:09.364Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":769589,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/769589.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End the mandatory fortification of white flour with folic acid immediately","background":"We call on the Government to stop the fortification of flour with synthetic folic acid. Folic acid is a medicine not a food. We believe it is unethical to mass medicate the entire population without their knowledge or consent in the hope that a minority group of people might see a benefit.","additional_details":"The NHS website lists sections of the population (including people with cancer, a stent or low vitamin B12 levels) who should avoid folic acid exposure because of possible detrimental health impacts. Even if these people are aware of the issue, it is becoming harder to avoid as wholemeal and gluten free products are voluntarily adding folic acid. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":51420,"closing_date":"2026-12-08","created_at":"2026-05-11T11:31:25.296Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T14:18:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-08T14:36:09.331Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-11T11:47:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-12T15:02:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:00.293Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Dr Clare Craig","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-29","summary":"Folic acid fortification is an evidenced public health measure, not a medical intervention. The policy applies to non-wholemeal flour, reflecting the flour-type already subject to fortification.","details":"The UK Government is mandating fortification of non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid with the primary objective to increase folic acid intake among women of childbearing age, thereby improving blood folate levels and reducing the risk of neural tube defects (NTDs) during pregnancy. The policy is projected to prevent around 200 NTD-affected pregnancies annually—approximately 20 per cent of UK cases. The population-level policy will have the wider benefit of increasing the intake of folic acid and improving folate status across the whole population. Folate, including folic acid, plays an important role in forming healthy red blood cells and maintaining brain health.\n\nPrevious efforts through public health campaigns to promote supplementation, as well as voluntary fortification by manufacturers, have had limited success. Despite longstanding UK public health advice recommending a daily supplement of 400 micrograms of folic acid before conception and during early pregnancy, uptake remains suboptimal, particularly among younger women and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Since almost half of pregnancies in the UK are unplanned, many women may not take supplements during the critical early weeks of gestation.\n\nThe policy has been carefully designed to be proportionate, targeting non-wholemeal wheat flour because it is widely consumed across the population and is the most effective vehicle for delivering the intended public health benefits. This approach is consistent with long-standing UK fortification requirements for wheat flour, including the mandatory addition of calcium, iron, niacin and thiamine, which also apply to non-wholemeal wheat flour produced to organic standards. Not fortifying wider than the type of flour that is presently fortified, means that individuals can avoid fortified flour if they choose to or need to. This includes wholemeal flour, gluten-free products and other flour types such as soya or spelt flour.\n\nTo ensure people can easily identify products that are suitable for them, added vitamins and minerals, including folic acid, must be labelled in the product’s ingredients list. This must also be declared when fortified flour is used as an ingredient.\n\nThe decision to fortify non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid has a long history and has been considered both by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), which advises the four UK governments on nutrition-related matters, and its predecessor, the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy. Folic acid fortification was recommended by the SACN in 2006, after an extensive review of the evidence on folate and health, which is available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sacn-folate-and-disease-prevention-report. Since then, there have been several further evidence reviews and modelling work (for example: https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/science-and-evidence/stochastic-modelling-to-estimate-the-potential-impact-of-fortification-of-flour-with-folic-acid-in-the-uk) to establish the level of folic acid to be added to flour, as well as to address concerns about potential adverse effects.\n\nThe policy has been subject to public consultations, including the 2019 Department of Health and Social Care and devolved governments consultation (available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/adding-folic-acid-to-flour/outcome/proposal-to-add-folic-acid-to-flour-consultation-response) on the proposal to fortify flour with folic acid (including a question on the effect on small businesses), and the 2022 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)-led consultation on the Bread and Flour Regulations. These consultations allowed members of the public, industry and health professionals to provide feedback and were a key part of policy development. Feedback to the Defra consultation highlighted consumer choice as a key concern. Limiting mandatory fortification to non-wholemeal wheat flour helps preserve choice by maintaining the availability of unfortified wholemeal and non-wheat flours. In addition, the policy does not apply to flour produced by small mills (definition based on their limited production capacity).\n\nThe NHS provides guidance for individuals who may need to avoid folic acid, for example, due to specific medical conditions or interactions with medication. People in this situation are advised to seek advice from a healthcare professional. Foods in the UK have been voluntarily fortified with folic acid for many years, including products such as breakfast cereals and spreads, without evidence of adverse health effects.\n\nThe UK Government and devolved governments are exploring how we will evaluate the impact of the policy.\n\nDepartment of Health & Social Care","created_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:00.287Z","updated_at":"2026-06-29T12:21:52.418Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":751401,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/751401.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ensure access to non-whole meal flour without folic acid fortification","background":"We call on the Government to amend the law to ensure there are at least one non-wholemeal flour option without folic acid fortification, and to exempt organic flour from mandatory folic acid fortification requirement from December 2026.","additional_details":"We believe this protects consumer choice and people who might need to avoid synthetic folic acid for health reasons.\r\n\r\nMandatory folic acid fortification affects the whole population, despite only a small proportion being at risk of issues due to a lack of folate, such as neural tube defects (NTDs) in unborn babies. NTDs only affect pregnancies, yet the entire population will be impacted. Some data suggests that NTDs can also stem from other causes, which folic acid cannot prevent. People should still have access to non-fortified and organic flour.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":24140,"created_at":"2025-11-21T16:51:00.915Z","updated_at":"2026-07-02T11:09:57.092Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-24T10:28:11.788Z","closed_at":"2026-06-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-21T19:29:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-05T15:21:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-29T12:08:22.765Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-29","summary":"The Government is mandating folic acid fortification to reduce neural tube defects. The policy applies to non-wholemeal flour, reflecting the existing flour-type already subject to fortification.","details":"The UK Government is mandating the fortification of non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid with the primary objective of increasing folic acid intake among women of childbearing age, thereby improving blood folate levels and reducing the risk of neural tube defects (NTDs) during pregnancy. The policy is projected to prevent around 200 NTD-affected pregnancies annually—approximately 20 per cent of UK cases. The population-level policy will have the wider benefit of increasing the intake of folic acid and improving folate status across the whole population. Folate, including folic acid, plays an important role in forming healthy red blood cells and maintaining brain health.\n\nPrevious efforts through public health campaigns to promote supplementation, as well as voluntary fortification by manufacturers, have had limited success. Despite longstanding UK public health advice recommending a daily supplement of 400 micrograms of folic acid before conception and during early pregnancy, uptake remains suboptimal, particularly among younger women and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. Since almost half of pregnancies in the UK are unplanned, many women may not take supplements during the critical early weeks of gestation.\n\nThe policy has been carefully designed to be proportionate, targeting non-wholemeal wheat flour because it is widely consumed across the population and is the most effective vehicle for delivering the intended public health benefits. This approach is consistent with long-standing UK fortification requirements for wheat flour, including the mandatory addition of calcium, iron, niacin and thiamine, which also apply to non-wholemeal wheat flour produced to organic standards. Not fortifying wider than the type of flour that is presently fortified, means that individuals can avoid fortified flour if they choose to or need to. This includes wholemeal flour, gluten-free products and other flour types such as soya or spelt flour.\n\nTo ensure people can easily identify products that are suitable for them, added vitamins and minerals, including folic acid, must be labelled in the product’s ingredients list. This must also be declared when fortified flour is used as an ingredient.\n\nThe decision to fortify non-wholemeal wheat flour with folic acid has a long history and has been considered both by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), which advises the four UK governments on nutrition-related matters, and its predecessor, the Committee on Medical Aspects of Food and Nutrition Policy. Folic acid fortification was recommended by the SACN in 2006, after an extensive review of the evidence on folate and health, which is available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sacn-folate-and-disease-prevention-report. Since then, there have been several further evidence reviews and modelling work (for example: https://www.foodstandards.gov.scot/science-and-evidence/stochastic-modelling-to-estimate-the-potential-impact-of-fortification-of-flour-with-folic-acid-in-the-uk) to establish the level of folic acid to be added to flour, as well as to address concerns about potential adverse effects.\n\nThe level of folic acid chosen for fortification (250 micrograms of folic acid per 100 grams of flour) was based on modelling carried out by Food Standards Scotland, with a view to minimising the risk of the population exceeding the tolerable upper intake level (the Government’s impact assessment is available at the following link: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024/1162/pdfs/uksiod_20241162_en_001.pdf). Fortifying at higher levels would allow for greater reductions in NTDs but this level was chosen to balance public health benefits with safety.\n\nThe policy has been subject to public consultations, including the 2019 Department of Health and Social Care and devolved governments consultation (available at the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/adding-folic-acid-to-flour/outcome/proposal-to-add-folic-acid-to-flour-consultation-response) on the proposal to fortify flour with folic acid (including a question on the effect on small businesses), and the 2022 Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)-led consultation on the Bread and Flour Regulations. These consultations allowed members of the public, industry and health professionals to provide feedback and were a key part of policy development. Feedback to the Defra consultation highlighted consumer choice as a key concern. Limiting mandatory fortification to non-wholemeal wheat flour helps preserve choice by maintaining the availability of unfortified wholemeal and non-wheat flours. In addition, the policy does not apply to flour produced by small mills (the definition of which is based on their limited production capacity).\n\nThe UK Government and devolved governments are exploring how we will evaluate the impact of the policy.\n\nDepartment of Health & Social Care","created_at":"2026-06-29T12:08:22.763Z","updated_at":"2026-06-29T12:09:22.286Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":754152,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/754152.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Create one-off amnesty with extra tax obligation for undocumented people","background":"Introduce a one-off amnesty for undocumented people currently living in the UK without a legal right to remain, granting them legal status to work. As part of this process those who are given the right to remain in the UK could pay a temporary additional tax to support the economy & public services","additional_details":"We believe that a scheme like this, combined with a temporary extra tax contribution, would bring people into the formal workforce, increase revenue for the Treasury, reduce exploitation, and promote community safety. In our view, countries that have introduced similar schemes have seen economic and social benefits and we believe this would create a fair, practical, and compassionate solution for the UK.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11122,"created_at":"2025-12-10T20:43:00.924Z","updated_at":"2026-07-23T23:00:06.146Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-23T08:36:40.960Z","closed_at":"2026-07-23T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-10T21:30:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-13T22:20:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-23T11:05:34.792Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-23","summary":"The Government rejects an amnesty as unfair, damaging to public confidence and encouraging illegal migration. Existing routes already enable individuals to regularise their status.","details":"The Government does not consider that introducing an amnesty for illegal migrants would be the way forward. An amnesty would be unfair on those people who have come to the UK and sought to remain through legal means. It would undermine public confidence in the UK’s immigration system, fuelling people smuggling and the exploitation of workers in the shadow economy. In addition, it would be likely to create problems for the future by encouraging more people to attempt to enter or stay illegally in the hope that they would be treated similarly.\n\nThe Immigration Rules provide for undocumented migrants who have been in the UK for a long time to regularise their status providing they have not broken the law beyond remaining here without lawful immigration status. The current family and private life Immigration Rules translate our obligations under Article 8 of the ECHR. \n\nFee waivers are available for certain specified human rights applications where a migrant is exercising the right to enter or remain in the UK based on family or private life, but cannot afford the fee, or where payment of the fee would have a disproportionate impact on a child’s wellbeing or best interests. \n\nThe Government’s approach to illegal migration is rooted in fairness, public confidence, and the integrity of the UK’s immigration system. Our policies are designed to ensure that migration is controlled, support is targeted to those genuinely in need, and the system is not open to abuse.\n\nThat is why we are now introducing the strongest set of reforms in a generation to get a grip on the system.  These reforms are firm but fair: protecting genuine refugees while ending the exploitation of Britain’s generosity.  Above all, they will reduce pressure on our community, restore order, and rebuild public confidence. Further information can be found online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/asylum-and-returns-policy-statement. \n\nWe must maintain the integrity of our immigration system and ensure it is fair to those who have done the right thing and migrated here lawfully, plus contributed by paying items like the Immigration Health Surcharge, while also ensuring it works for UK taxpayers who fund public services. We will not reward those who exploit the system and break the rules by implementing this request.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-06-23T11:05:34.789Z","updated_at":"2026-06-23T11:05:34.789Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":768417,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/768417.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban the sale and consumption of alcohol in House of Commons venues ","background":"I would like the House of Commons to ban the sale and consumption of alcohol within House of Commons venues on the Parliamentary estate.","additional_details":"I believe drinking is incompatible in the modern workplace. MPs have a crucial role in passing laws which impacts the lives of the citizens of the UK. I believe that the consumption of alcohol, whilst making important decisions that can have far reaching consequences, is clearly not in the national interest.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":19518,"closing_date":"2026-11-26","created_at":"2026-04-26T22:49:44.789Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:31:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-26T12:29:40.003Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-27T07:28:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-01T10:54:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-23T08:53:08.869Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Iwan ap Dafydd","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-07-16","summary":"The sale of alcohol on the Parliamentary estate is a matter for the House authorities. ","details":"The sale of alcohol on the Parliamentary estate is a matter for the House Authorities. As such, a copy of the petition has been shared with them for their consideration and they have provided the following response: \n\n“The Parliamentary Estate is a unique environment that combines workplace, public access, events, ceremonial and democratic functions, and the services provided reflect this wide range of users and activities. Alcohol is served in some venues within the Estate which can be accessed by passholders, including Members, staff and others that require access, as well as visitors who attend for events and functions. \n\n“There are no plans to change the current arrangements. The House Authorities maintain venue management processes and staff training to support safe and moderate consumption and to ensure the responsible operation of catering services. House venues also provide a range of low and no‑alcohol drinks to support individual choice and promote responsible consumption. \n\n“Parliament’s Behaviour Code sets clear expectations about how everyone should behave when on the Parliamentary Estate. Those who choose to drink in Parliament must do so responsibly.”\n\nOffice of the Leader of the House of Commons\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/768417","created_at":"2026-06-23T08:53:08.866Z","updated_at":"2026-07-17T13:20:50.014Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":768687,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/768687.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Amend standards for PIP to clearly include type 1 diabetics","background":"Type 1 diabetics do not usually qualify for PIP despite dealing with a dangerous condition 24 hours a day. We believe there is a general lack of understanding and education of Type 1 Diabetes which may affect PIP assessments.","additional_details":"Managing Type 1 Diabetes is a relentless, 24-hour responsibility that requires frequent blood glucose monitoring, insulin adjustments, and careful planning around food, activity, and stress. When combined with the pressures of full-time employment, this can lead to significant physical exhaustion and mental burnout. We believe allowing more types 1 diabetics to receive PIP would provide financial support for helpful technology not provided by the NHS and support individuals to reduce working hours due to the demands of managing the condition.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":17359,"closing_date":"2026-12-02","created_at":"2026-04-29T21:48:40.241Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:15:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-06-02T09:24:36.656Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-02T10:12:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-08T13:22:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-22T13:59:22.294Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Emily Jones","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-22","summary":"PIP is not condition-based. Individuals are assessed by disability experts who focus on functional needs. The Timms Review will ensure PIP is fair and fit for the future and will report in the autumn.","details":"People can be impacted by health conditions in different ways, so PIP uses a functional assessment to measure the impact of a person’s health condition or impairment on their day-to-day life rather than focusing solely on the health condition or impairment itself.\n\nThe assessment looks at an individual’s ability to carry out a series of key everyday activities which are fundamental to living an independent life, such as their ability to prepare, cook and eat food, dress and undress, make budgeting decisions, manage and monitor their health condition, engage with other people, and plan and follow journeys.\n\nThe PIP assessment criteria were developed in collaboration with independent specialists in health, social care & disability, including disabled people, to ensure they accurately assess an individual’s needs. Health conditions may be physical, sensory, mental, intellectual or cognitive, or any combination of these, and the assessment was designed to take a comprehensive approach to disability, reflecting the needs arising from the full range of conditions. The activities within the assessment consider not only the physical barriers to completion of those activities, but whether someone needs prompting or supervision to do them.\n\nHealth Professionals (HPs) who conduct PIP assessments are trained specialists in disability analysis, including how to assess the impacts of medical conditions on people’s day-to-day activities, as well as awareness training in a range of conditions, symptoms and disabilities. To support HPs in delivering informed assessments, HPs have access to a wide range of Core Training and Guidance Material (CTGM), which offer detailed clinical and functional information, including the potential risks and limitations of conditions such as Type 1 Diabetes.\n\nWe recognise that, since PIP was introduced, there have been shifting trends in health and disability, as well in the workplace and wider society. The Government launched the Timms Review, the first ever full review of PIP and its assessment are fair and fit for the future.\n\nThe Review is being co-produced with disabled people, the organisations that represent them and other experts so that a wide range of views and voices are heard. The Review’s steering group, almost all of whom are disabled, are looking at whether the current assessment effectively captures the impact of long-term health conditions in the modern world. The Review will report to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in autumn, with an interim update in summer.\n\nDepartment for Work and Pensions","created_at":"2026-06-22T13:59:22.292Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T13:59:22.292Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DWP","name":"Department for Work and Pensions","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-work-pensions"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764268,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764268.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect legal right to support for children with SEND","background":"I believe that the Government’s proposed SEND reforms could limit EHCPs, weaken legal rights, replace individual plans with packages, reduce appeals, and remove school choice. In my view, children could be left without the support they need as a result.","additional_details":"I think the Government’s SEND reforms could limit EHCPs, weaken legal rights, raise thresholds, replace individual plans with generic packages, reduce appeal rights, remove school choice, and push children into inclusion zones without proper support. Many children rely on these rights to support every day, without them many could be left behind, struggling, unsupported, and unheard.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":28376,"closing_date":"2026-10-14","created_at":"2026-03-13T19:29:47.335Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:57:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-14T14:49:10.055Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-13T19:59:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-03T13:09:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-22T13:21:27.888Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Tee-Jay Chetwynd","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-22","summary":"The government’s SEND reform proposal will strengthen legal duties, better support children with SEND in mainstream settings and ensure EHCPs secure statutory support for children with complex needs.","details":"The government’s proposed reforms strengthen the legal duties to support children with SEND in mainstream settings. The SEND consultation proposes a new legal requirement for schools to create individual support plans (ISPs) for all children with SEND, developed by their nursery, school or college in discussion with parents, children and any other professionals such as healthcare experts involved in that child’s care. ISPs would evolve with the child’s needs, enable information about their needs and support to transfer with them as a digital record throughout the education system ensuring support can be planned and parents aren’t having to retell stories or repeatedly fight for support, ultimately helping to transform the life chances of children with SEND. EHCPs will continue for children with complex needs, securing statutory right to education and healthcare support. \n\nUnder our proposed reforms, educational provision in a reformed EHCP would be underpinned by evidence-based specialist provision packages commissioned by local authorities (LAs) and delivered by settings. Because settings know the child or young person best, we propose they work with families before EHCPs are finalised to set out the provision aligned with the package(s) that the child needs. Settings will have a legal duty to deliver what is in the EHCP.\n\nEffective early identification and intervention is critical in improving the outcomes of children and young people with SEND. To support schools to meet this legal duty, we have appointed an Independent Expert Panel to  develop National Inclusion Standards. The Standards  should set out minimum standards that all settings must adhere to, and include a range of evidence-informed tools, strategies and approaches for educators to draw on to identify and support children and young people with additional needs. With earlier identification and a more inclusive mainstream, children and young people with SEND should get the support they need, as soon as they need it. This will be backed by investment of £1.6 billion over the next three years for early years settings, schools and colleges to deliver whole school approaches and individual support in line with the National Inclusion Standards.\n\nIn addition, we are investing £1.8 billion over the next three years for local area partnerships, including local authorities and Integrated Care Boards, to develop a new Experts at Hand offer. This offer is designed to strengthen the capability of mainstream education settings by providing access to support from health and specialist education practitioners, including speech and language therapists,  support workers or assistants, occupational therapists and support workers or assistants, educational psychologists and trainees, and specialist teachers, both local authority-based and those based in specialist or alternative provision settings. \n\nThis new offer is designed to meet children’s needs earlier and more effectively without needing to wait for a diagnosis or bureaucratic assessment processes. Expert health and education staff will work alongside nursery workers and school and college staff to embed effective interventions, provide training and upskilling and help to accurately identify and assess need.\n\nTo support delivery, over £40 million is being invested in the specialist workforce, including £26 million to train more educational psychologists and £15 million to support more speech and language therapists to work with education settings.\n\nThe package of proposed reforms aims to put an end to the postcode lottery in support ensuring there are clear national standards for the support every child with SEND should receive. We are reforming the statutory needs assessment, co-designing with families, education and healthcare experts to deliver high quality, fair assessments across the country. Alongside this both EHCPs and ISPs will have a new digital template meaning they can move easily with children and families and preventing the need for reassessments and new local processes if children move between local authority areas.\n\nUnder our proposed reforms, the SEND Tribunal would remain a legal backstop for the most important EHC decisions. We propose strengthening mediation services to encourage families to work closely with local authorities and settings to develop solutions to problems, without the need for a Tribunal appeal, in line with the best practice currently seen in some local authorities. However, if early resolution is not possible, under our proposed reforms, parents and young people would be able to appeal to the Tribunal about:\n\no   a local authority’s refusal to assess whether a child or young person needs an EHCP\no   whether a child or young person needs a Specialist Provision Package and therefore needs an EHCP\no   which Specialist Provision Package(s) the child or young person should have\no   the local authority’s decision about which school or setting should be named in the EHCP – although we propose to amend the Tribunal’s existing powers so that it can require the LA to retake the decision, rather than the Tribunal deciding which school or setting should be named in the EHCP.\no   a decision to amend, not amend or cease an EHCP following review.\n\nWe have recently welcomed feedback via the consultation on 'SEND reform: putting children and young people first’, which ran for 12 weeks closing on 18 May. We are reviewing responses alongside feedback from over 200 engagement events held over the 12 weeks.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-06-22T13:21:27.883Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T13:22:17.875Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":763785,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/763785.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require accessible changing benches for disabled children in public venues","background":"Introduce requirements for large public venues such as supermarkets and family attractions to provide accessible changing benches so disabled children who outgrow baby changing tables can be safely changed in public places","additional_details":"Many disabled children outgrow baby changing tables by around 2–3 years old but still require continence or medical care. Without suitable facilities, families are often forced to change children on toilet floors, in public spaces, or leave venues early. Some families avoid going out entirely. Accessible changing benches would allow disabled children to be cared for safely and with dignity in public places.","committee_note":null,"state":"open","signature_count":11607,"closing_date":"2026-10-09","created_at":"2026-03-09T18:34:08.848Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T08:52:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-09T12:02:25.954Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-09T18:52:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-30T13:28:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-22T13:04:14.282Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Miss Ella Bess Dean","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-22","summary":"Provision for Changing Places toilets in larger public buildings is made through Building Regulations; we will keep standards under review but have no plans for regulatory change at this time.","details":"Statutory guidance in Approved Document M (Volume 2: Access to and use of buildings) of the Building Regulations 2010 sets out provision for Changing Places facilities in new buildings other than dwellings (or those undergoing major redevelopment) which fall above a certain size threshold. This includes certain types of large public buildings, such as places of assembly, recreation and entertainment, plus larger retail, shopping malls, sport and leisure buildings, and in hospitals, primary care, crematoria and cemetery buildings. \n\nChanging Places toilets are larger accessible toilets for individuals with complex and multiple disabilities and includes equipment such as hoists, curtains, adult-sized changing benches and space for carers. \n\nThe government works closely with the Building Safety Regulator (BSR) to review building standards across England, including requirements for safe and accessible changing facilities.\n\nFurther details can be found in paragraphs 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7 of Approved Document M, Volume 2: Access to and use of buildings. This can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/access-to-and-use-of-buildings-approved-document-m \n\nMinistry of Housing, Communities and Local Government","created_at":"2026-06-22T13:04:14.279Z","updated_at":"2026-06-22T13:04:14.279Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DBIST","name":"Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":759116,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/759116.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce VAT on hospitality to 10%: protect jobs, communities & UK competitiveness","background":"Reduce VAT on hospitality to 10% to prevent closures & protect tax revenue. When venues close, HMRC loses 100% of its VAT, business rates, PAYE & corporation tax, reducing employment & supply chains. We believe a lower VAT rate would keep viable businesses trading, securing jobs & ongoing revenue.","additional_details":"Hospitality businesses operate on very tight margins and struggle to absorb 20% VAT alongside rising food, energy, wage and rent costs. We believe a permanent reduction to 10% VAT would save jobs, keep venues open, support apprenticeships and skills, and strengthen high streets – it would help businesses survive and continue contributing billions to the UK economy.\r\n \r\nThis would protect local jobs, keep pubs and restaurants open, and help high streets, tourism and communities survive.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":15909,"closing_date":"2026-09-12","created_at":"2026-01-28T13:25:47.657Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T10:42:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-12T10:07:38.960Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-28T15:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-06-04T18:53:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-19T08:54:31.815Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Craig Wilkinson","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-19","summary":"The Government is supporting UK hospitality through Great British Summer Savings and lower business rates. Cutting VAT to 10% would cost around £11 billion a year.","details":"The Government recognises the significant contribution made by hospitality businesses to economic growth and social life in the UK. Pubs, cafes and restaurants are at the heart of our communities.\n\nFrom 25 June to 1 September the Government is introducing Great British Summer Savings, which is a temporary reduced rate of VAT on children's menu meals and eligible family attractions, cutting VAT on eligible activities from 20% to 5%.\n\nThis is a targeted and temporary scheme to reduce the costs of children’s meals in restaurants, children’s tickets for theatres and cinemas and tickets for everyone for attractions like soft play, adventure centres, and theme parks, helping families enjoy a day out for less.\n\nVAT is a broad-based tax on consumption, and the 20 per cent standard rate applies to most goods and services. Exceptions to the standard rate have always been limited and balanced against affordability considerations. Reducing VAT for hospitality to 10 per cent would come at a significant fiscal cost.\n\nHMRC estimates that reducing the standard rate of VAT to 10% on accommodation and food and beverage services would cost approximately £11 billion a year, meaning tax rises or spending cuts elsewhere, or increased borrowing. For context, £11 billion is roughly equivalent to the annual Child Benefit bill, the total expenditure on the Royal Navy or a 1 percentage point rise in the Standard Rate of VAT.\n\nWe keep all taxes under review and make decisions on changes at Budgets, where they can be considered in the context of the overall public finances.\n\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2026-06-19T08:54:31.812Z","updated_at":"2026-06-19T08:54:31.812Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":761058,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/761058.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban and stop the “15 minute cities” initiative in the UK","background":"Ban the “15 minute cities” initiative which is happening in places such as Oxford immediately and stop all councils immediately from implementing such schemes for which there is no national mandate.","additional_details":"We believe the initiative is a restriction on individual freedom of movement & restricts people’s ability to choose where they live, work or travel, contravening both the Human Rights Act & ECHR (primarily through Article 2 of Protocol #4) which guarantees the right to move freely & choose their residence in the territory they live in, ensuring that individuals can live, work & travel domestically without arbitrary restriction. In our view there are no valid or proven reasons for this initiative to go ahead.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":11445,"closing_date":"2026-10-08","created_at":"2026-02-13T20:04:09.403Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:24:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-08T09:03:01.209Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-14T18:04:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-25T07:57:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-16T15:11:36.404Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"natalie kearney","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-16","summary":"The 15-minute cities concept is not national policy. Local authorities can set planning and transport policies locally through the normal democratic process. The Government has no plans to intervene.","details":"The 15-minute cities concept is not national policy. The Government does not direct places to use the 15-minute city concept.\n\nThe term ‘15-minute city’ has become incorrectly associated with traffic management measures such as low-traffic neighbourhoods.  Low-traffic neighbourhoods aim to restrict through traffic, or rat-running, from an area but do not prevent vehicle access to any premises within the area. Access by car may require an alternative route. These types of schemes do not seek to restrict people’s ability to travel in the way claimed.\n\nLocal authorities are able to develop planning and transport initiatives, including traffic management measures, to benefit residents and businesses, on which local people are able to give their views in response to consultations. Local authorities are not able to limit residents’ ability to travel in ways which contravene Human Rights. They can however encourage more sustainable / active travel and better access to local services.\n\nUnder long standing devolved arrangements, local highway authorities are free to make their own decisions about the design of the streets under their care, provided they take account of the relevant legislation. They are responsible for ensuring that their actions are within the law and are accountable to local people for their decisions and their performance. Local councillors are responsible for ensuring that local decisions about street infrastructure take account of the needs and opinions of local people.\n\nThe National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) set out the Government’s planning policies for England. The NPPF is clear that transport issues should be considered from the earliest stages of plan-making and development proposals, using a vision-led approach to identify transport solutions that deliver well-designed, sustainable and popular places. This should involve identifying and pursuing opportunities to promote walking, cycling and public transport. It also sets out that local planning policies and decisions should aim to promote social interaction, for example, through ensuring a mix of development types, strong neighbourhood centres, street layouts allowing for easy cycle and pedestrian connections and active street frontages\n\nMinistry of Housing, Communities and Local Government","created_at":"2026-06-16T15:11:36.394Z","updated_at":"2026-06-16T15:12:31.309Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MHCLG","name":"Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housing-communities-local-government"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764375,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764375.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Codify rules for MPs' attendance in Parliament & their constituency in statute","background":"Codify in statute clear and binding obligations for MPs on time spent in their constituency and in Parliament. We think that leaving it to convention unfortunately allows a minority to abuse the system.","additional_details":"MPs are well paid from the public purse to represent the people, and it is important to ensure that they fulfil their responsibilities once elected. We find current arrangements unpalatable and want statutory rules to be introduced with stronger mechanisms to hold them to account if they fail to carry out their duties.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":23592,"closing_date":"2026-10-15","created_at":"2026-03-15T09:00:23.466Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T14:10:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-15T15:10:50.517Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-15T11:57:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-26T07:55:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-16T14:38:21.311Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Caroline Hurst","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-16","summary":"The Government is committed to maintaining high standards of conduct in public life, but has no plans to introduce rules to codify or mandate MPs' attendance in Parliament or their constituencies. ","details":"Under the UK’s constitutional framework, it is ultimately for voters to \njudge whether their elected representative is fulfilling their duties \neffectively. \n\nMembers of Parliament are not employees; they are independently \nelected office holders, chosen by their constituents to represent them in \nthe House of Commons. As they do not have an employer-employee \nrelationship with either the government or parliamentary authorities, \nthere is no formal mechanism, employment contract or statute that \ndictates their working hours or daily location.\n\nThe role of an MP requires considerable flexibility to balance varied \nresponsibilities. A lack of physical presence in the House of Commons \nChamber does not mean an MP is not working; they may be scrutinising \npolicy or legislation in committee, meeting with ministers on behalf of \nconstituents, or managing local casework. Mandating a strict statutory \nsplit between Westminster and constituency time would restrict an MP's \nability to respond dynamically to local or national priorities.\n\nWhilst general daily attendance is not legally mandated, there are \nalready robust mechanisms in place to ensure MPs remain accountable \nto the public and to Parliament:\n\n● The Code of Conduct: All MPs must adhere to the Commons Code \nof Conduct, which is supervised by the independent Parliamentary \nCommissioner for Standards and the Commons Committee on \nStandards. The Code is underpinned by the Seven Principles of \nPublic Life (the Nolan Principles), which call on all office holders, \nincluding MPs, to act with integrity and openness.\n\n● The political party system: Political parties manage attendance for \nkey parliamentary business, such as votes (divisions) and debates, \nthrough their respective whips.\n\n● Select committee attendance: Select committees publish data on \nthe attendance records of their members. In addition, in 2010 the \nHouse of Commons introduced rules enabling the removal of an \nMP from a select committee if they fail to attend at least 60% of its \nformal meetings during a session.\n\n● The Recall of MPs Act 2015: The recall process allows \nconstituents to sign a petition to trigger a by-election and remove \ntheir MP from office if specific triggers are met, such as \nimprisonment following a criminal conviction, suspension from the \nHouse of the requisite length, or false expenses claims.\n\nIn addition, the public may scrutinise an MP's activity by examining \nminutes of committee meetings and records of debates or divisions, all \nof which are routinely published on the Parliament website.\n\nIn recognition of the fact that MPs should be focusing on their \nparliamentary duties and representing their constituents, the government \nhas also committed to banning second jobs for MPs, outside of very \nlimited exceptions such as for maintaining a professional qualification. \nThe House of Commons’ Committee on Standards is currently \nexamining this matter.\n\nUltimately, the government believes that the most effective and \ndemocratic mechanism for holding MPs to account is the electoral \nprocess itself. Every general election provides constituents with the \ndirect opportunity to scrutinise their MP’s track record, visibility and \ncommitment to their area. Voters can, and sometimes do, choose to \nremove MPs whom they feel have failed to adequately engage with \neither their parliamentary or constituency responsibilities.\n\nBy keeping this responsibility with the electorate rather than codified in \nlaw, the UK preserves the essential principle that MPs answer directly to \nthe people they represent.\n\nOffice of the Leader of the House of Commons","created_at":"2026-06-16T14:38:21.308Z","updated_at":"2026-06-16T14:44:31.971Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":767687,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/767687.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Hold a UK-wide briefing on climate and nature risks","background":"The UK faces growing risks from climate and nature breakdown - from extreme weather to economic disruption and national security threats. Yet the public has never been given a clear national briefing on the scale of these risks. Government should hold an emergency briefing from leading experts.","additional_details":"These risks could have serious consequences across UK society, with threats to health and food supply - which could become irreversible if without urgent action. Many people are unclear how these risks may affect them, and information in the public domain is often misleading.\r\n \r\nA credible national briefing from independent experts would give people clear, trusted guidance on what these risks mean in practice, and what we can do - both together and individually - to prepare and respond.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":105488,"closing_date":"2026-11-20","created_at":"2026-04-18T21:09:56.887Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T14:18:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-20T08:54:04.640Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-19T09:38:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-21T12:08:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-15T10:54:01.418Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-08-16T09:55:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Christopher Packham","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-15","summary":"We recognise the growing risks from climate and nature breakdown, and are committed to speaking clearly about the scale of the crisis and providing reliable sources for information and advice.","details":"The UK government recognises the growing risks from climate and nature breakdown. Nature and a stable climate underpin our health, economy, national security and critical services.\n\nThe National Emergency Briefing campaign is right to highlight climate change as a major threat for the UK and the world as set out in our ‘National security assessment on global ecosystems’ in January 2026.\n\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/nature-security-assessment-on-global-biodiversity-loss-ecosystem-collapse-and-national-security\n\nThe government welcomes their work and we are committed to speaking clearly about the scale of the crisis.\n\nIn July 2025, the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, Ed Miliband MP, alongside the then Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Steve Reed MP, gave the first-ever statement on the State of Climate and Nature.\n\nThe statement provided an honest appraisal of the state of climate and nature in the UK and the action being taken to benefit people now, as well as future generations, demonstrating how the choices we make as a country influence the course of global action. To promote the statement, the Energy Secretary spoke to national broadcasters and newspapers about the threat of climate change to our British way of life, securing widespread coverage across print, online and broadcast.\n\nWe intend to undertake a second statement this summer to demonstrate the scale of the challenge and emphasise the steps that the government and UK citizens are taking to prepare and respond to the climate and nature crisis.\n\nWe recognise that climate risks are increasing in urgency across sectors and we need to go further and faster to ensure that our country, communities and natural environment are resilient to climate change. We have committed to strengthening our approach and are working together across government to deliver actions to improve our resilience.  We will set out stronger adaptation objectives for a more ambitious fourth National Adaptation Programme (NAP4) in 2028.\n\nWe already communicate with the public about the urgency of these issues and provide reliable sources for information and advice. The Adverse Weather and Health Plan (AWHP), which forms part of the Third National Adaptation Programme, brings together the Weather-Health Alerting System (in collaboration with the Met Office) and practical guidance to reduce health impacts from events such as heat, flooding and drought. The AWHP adopts a whole-of-society approach, aiming to strengthen public and organisational communication, enhance resilience, and support both preparedness and effective response to protect health across society now and in the future.\n\nAt the same time, we are restoring and protecting nature. In December 2025, we published the revised Environmental Improvement Plan (EIP). The EIP is the government’s long-term plan for improving the natural environment and the enjoyment of it. It clearly describes the actions we need to take and who is responsible for delivering them. This will help us to restore nature, improve environmental quality, create a circular economy, protect environmental security and improve people’s access to nature.\n\nWe are also taking action to reduce the impact of climate change on food production and to support the continued production and supply of food for UK citizens. We rely upon a combination of strong domestic production from the UK’s agricultural and food manufacturing sectors and a diverse range of overseas supply sources to ensure a consistent supply of food. We are providing support through our farming schemes to improve sector resilience and through innovation. For example, Defra’s Crop Genetic Improvement Networks funds research to develop crop varieties that are more productive, sustainable, and more resilient to climate change.\n\nThe Simpler Recycling reforms ensure that across England, people are able to recycle the same materials, whether at home, work or school.  In particular, collecting food waste separately from residual waste allows us to send it for anaerobic digestion or composting. This reduces the amount of food waste going to landfill, where it releases harmful greenhouse gases, helping to achieve our Net Zero strategy target to eliminate biodegradable waste sent to landfill from 2028.\n\nWe recognise we will only succeed if we take people with us and act together. That is why we are ensuring the public has a voice in how we create a more sustainable and more prosperous society. We published Energising Britain, the UK’s first public participation plan. This plan sets out how we will work to ensure people have the facts and understand the scale, pace of change and benefits of climate and nature action, and the benefits to their local communities. It includes working with businesses and communities to ensure everyone can benefit from our mission, including through policies that are responsive to people's needs and views. \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-06-15T10:54:01.415Z","updated_at":"2026-06-15T10:58:26.161Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":765360,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765360.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Mandate standardised cancer training for all GPs in England","background":"We ask the Government to mandate cancer training for all GPs in England, requiring all GPs to complete mandatory, standardised training on cancer red-flag symptoms, with formal assessment, regular revalidation, NHS England regulation, and GMC linkage to improve early diagnosis.","additional_details":"Early cancer diagnosis saves lives, yet delays in primary care remain. There is no mandatory, standardised training for GPs on cancer red-flag symptoms or reassessment. We call for nationally mandated, assessed, and regularly updated training to improve recognition, reduce delays, and improve patient outcomes, especially for children and young people.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":17582,"closing_date":"2026-11-01","created_at":"2026-03-25T18:12:06.727Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T08:49:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-05-01T13:24:38.052Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-25T18:27:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-27T14:47:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-09T09:24:41.265Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Natasha Hill","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-09","summary":"It is crucial that GPs are able to identify cancer symptoms early. Our National Cancer Plan and Jess’s Rule support this. Standards and training for GPs are led by regulatory and professional bodies.","details":"Alongside the relevant bodies which set the standards and training curricula that doctors must follow, the Government is taking action to improve early diagnosis through the National Cancer Plan for England and the introduction of Jess’s Rule. While the requests of the petitioners sit outside the direct remit of Government, we are committed to improving the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes of people with cancer of all ages.\n\nThe National Cancer Plan for England, published earlier this year, sets out a comprehensive ten-year strategy to transform cancer outcomes across the country. It focuses on earlier diagnosis, faster treatment, better survival rates, and reducing inequalities in cancer care, with a firmly patient-centred approach.\n\nThe Government’s central ambition is that by 2035, three in four people diagnosed with cancer will be cancer-free or living well five years after diagnosis – up from roughly 60 per cent today. Achieving this would save hundreds of thousands of lives and make England a world leader in cancer survival. Improving outcomes in primary care will play a key role in this.\n\nThrough initiatives in the National Cancer Plan, primary care teams will be equipped to spot signs that could indicate cancer. The Plan commits to continued support for the Gateway C digital training platform. A new generation of digital support tools will help flag concerning symptoms or test results in general practice. In addition, from 2026 we will pilot an incentive encouraging the use of electronic safety netting to increase the number of people who complete checks for bowel cancer.\n\nIn September 2025, we introduced Jess’s Rule in memory of Jess Brady, who passed away due to cancer in December 2020.\n\nJess’s Rule (three strikes and we rethink) encourages GP teams to re-evaluate why the patient’s condition remains unresolved and/or consider why their symptoms are escalating. It promotes consistency of care but also prompts GP teams to consult with one another to jointly reconsider any red flags that have been missed that could point to another diagnosis, and to challenge any assumptions that may have been made based on a patient’s age or demographic.\n\nAs a part of the implementation of Jess’s Rule, the Royal College of General Practitioners, along with the Jessica Brady CEDAR Trust, developed a learning module to support earlier cancer diagnosis in young adults. The Jessica Brady CEDAR Trust have also produced a training video on Jess’s Rule to support the delivery and implementation of the rule.\n\nThe General Medical Council (GMC) is the regulator of all medical doctors, physician assistants (PAs) and physician assistants in anaesthesia (PAAs) (still legally known as anaesthesia associates and physician associates) practising in the UK. It sets and enforces the standards all doctors, PAs and PAAs must adhere to. The GMC is independent of Government, directly accountable to Parliament, and is responsible for operational matters concerning the discharge of its statutory duties.\n\nFrom the academic year 2024-25, the GMC introduced the Medical Licensing Assessment (MLA), which creates a framework for testing the core knowledge, skills, and behaviours of doctors who want to practise in the UK. An updated MLA comes into force for medical students from September 2026. The GMC does not deliver, design, or commission education and training. Each medical college sets its own undergraduate curriculum.\n\nThe training curriculum for postgraduate trainee GPs is set by the Royal College of General Practitioners, and has to meet the standards set by the General Medical Council. The RCGP provides a number of resources on cancer prevention, diagnosis, and care for GPs, relevant for the primary care setting.\n\nAll UK-registered doctors are expected to meet the professional standards set out in the GMC’s Good Medical Practice. In 2012, the GMC introduced revalidation which supports doctors in regularly reflecting on how they can develop or improve their practice, giving patients confidence doctors are up to date with their practice and promoting improved quality of care by driving improvements in clinical governance.\n\nQualified GPs are subject to these revalidation requirements overseen by the GMC with the process led by the RCGP; continuous professional development is a cornerstone of demonstrating suitability to continue to practice safely. For GPs, the RCGP advises that learning stretches across the GP curriculum over the five-year cycle, informed by a wide variety of sources and kept up to date as part of normal professional practice.\n\nGPs are responsible for ensuring their own clinical knowledge remains up to date and for identifying learning needs as part of their continuing professional development. This activity should include taking account of new research and developments in guidance, such as that produced by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, to ensure that they can continue to provide high quality care to all patients.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-06-09T09:24:41.262Z","updated_at":"2026-06-09T09:27:52.575Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":765464,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765464.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect raced greyhounds from exports by introducing spay/neuter laws","background":"Make it law to spay and neuter all raced greyhounds once they finish racing on licensed race tracks to protect them from being shipped around the world to breeding/racing kennels.","additional_details":"There is strong evidence that raced greyhounds can be sold in the guise of pets to countries where there are little to no welfare laws. British raced greyhounds are found in China at breeding/racing kennels. Some rescued and returned to Britain have been found to be emaciated and bred from up until very old age, over 11yrs old. Many are confined to cages for their whole lives. \r\n \r\nI am concerned that the public are led to believe that almost all greyhounds are safely retired into loving homes. Shipping data exists showing the ongoing shipment of greyhounds to breeding facilities in Pakistan where we are concerned that there are outdated welfare laws.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":11568,"closing_date":"2026-10-24","created_at":"2026-03-26T14:26:18.573Z","updated_at":"2026-08-16T21:26:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-24T12:53:32.484Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-26T15:28:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-08T17:46:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-09T08:36:03.194Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Margaret Rita Jones","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-09","summary":"The government’s animal welfare priorities to 2030 are set in the Animal Welfare Strategy published in December 2025. Defra is not currently considering changes to the neutering or spaying of dogs.","details":"Defra provides advice to dog owners in the Code of Practice for the Welfare of Dogs, which can be found here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5ac78152ed915d76a04b2da6/pb13333-cop-dogs-091204.pdf. \nThe code recommends that owners of dogs that do not intend to breed their dog can consult their vet to discuss the benefits of neutering.  \n\nMore specifically, the main regulatory body for greyhound racing in Great Britain (the Greyhound Board of Great Britain - GBGB) has a homing policy that requires that where a greyhound is being placed in the care of a homing charity or in a new pet home, the greyhound should be neutered or spayed prior to being transferred to its retirement destination. Furthermore, where a greyhound leaves racing for breeding, GBGB requires the full details of the new kennel/breeding establishment. As with all retirement placements, GBGB requires trainers or owners to carry out due diligence on the breeder and must be confident that they will provide suitable welfare standards. GBGB also works with Greyhound Racing Ireland and the Irish Coursing Club to monitor GBGB-registered greyhounds that travel to Ireland for breeding.\n\nThe government does not believe it necessary to legislate to require dogs to be neutered or spayed in general, or for all racing greyhounds to be neutered or spayed once they leave racing.  There would be several potentially complex welfare issues to consider, such as the impact on the British breeding of greyhounds as well as any effect on inbreeding in greyhounds. The Government’s priorities for animal welfare till 2030 have been set out in the Animal Welfare Strategy published in December 2025. Defra currently has no plans to consider changes to the neutering and spaying of greyhounds or of dogs more generally. \n\nDefra also has very few records of applications for export health certificates to export greyhounds directly to Pakistan or China. Although we are unable to account for any movements of greyhounds abroad that may have transited through a third country first, or have not involved a certificate, there is no reason to suspect that there is significant demand for former racing greyhounds from Great Britain in Pakistan or China\n\nIf further intelligence or evidence emerges that this is a widespread issue, and if there is suspicion that offences related to facilitating this trade are being committed in this country, we would engage immediately with enforcement partners and ensure that appropriate and robust investigations are carried out.\n\nGBGB has stated that it is similarly concerned about any retired greyhounds being exported abroad and it does not support the export of greyhounds to countries where welfare standards cannot be verified.  GBGB have said they will take disciplinary action against anyone licensed with GBGB found knowingly supplying greyhounds to such countries.  \n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","created_at":"2026-06-09T08:36:03.190Z","updated_at":"2026-06-09T08:36:45.539Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764140,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764140.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review discharge of mental health patients","background":"Why do we allow people struggling with mental health to be discharged alone. We think this is a huge safeguarding issue and not protecting the vulnerable. A review should consider requiring that patients are discharged into the care of someone. We think this could prevent the loss of lives.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":14577,"closing_date":"2026-10-24","created_at":"2026-03-12T18:14:28.793Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T08:48:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-24T11:10:12.702Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-12T19:44:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-17T19:42:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-08T15:06:54.426Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Miss Tamsyn Midwinter","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-08","summary":"The Government agrees that people should be provided with the right support post-discharge, as set out in statutory guidance. There are no plans for a review.","details":"The Government recognises the importance of safe and well-planned discharge from mental health inpatient settings, and the need to ensure that people receive appropriate support as they move back into the community. This is particularly important given that the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety in Mental Health has found there is an increased risk of suicide within three days of discharge.\n\nThe statutory guidance on discharge from mental health inpatient settings, published in 2024, is clear that local areas and commissioners should ensure the right individualised support can be provided post-discharge. This may include commissioning step-down services, specialist supported accommodation, or collaboration with the voluntary and community sector.\n\nIf a person is homeless, or at risk of becoming homeless, hospitals have a duty to refer them to local housing authorities. Local commissioners should consider the needs of people experiencing homelessness being discharged from mental health hospitals, including the commissioning of appropriate accommodation and support upon discharge.\n\nThe Government is also strengthening the legal framework for discharge through reforms to the Mental Health Act. Currently a patient’s responsible clinician can, in law, unilaterally decide to discharge a hospital inpatient from certain powers of the Act. Under the Mental Health Act 2025 they will be required to consult with someone else who has been professionally concerned with the patient’s treatment, whether that be in the hospital or in the community, who is from a different profession from them. This is to ensure a more rounded perspective on the patient’s readiness for discharge from the Act and to align with existing best practice. We will build on this further in secondary legislation and in statutory guidance – including that patients must receive a personalised plan for ensuring their safety before and after discharge, as part of the new statutory care and treatment plan.\n\nThere are no plans to undertake a separate review of the merits of requiring all patients to be discharged into the care of another person. The focus remains on ensuring that existing guidance is consistently implemented and that discharge decisions are tailored to each individual’s needs and circumstances.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-06-08T15:06:54.424Z","updated_at":"2026-06-08T15:07:31.546Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":765130,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765130.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund permanent, 24-hour police patrols in Jewish communities","background":"In the face of a significant rise of antisemitism across the UK, we ask the Government to fund permanent 24-hour police patrols in Jewish communities.","additional_details":"Following the antisemitic attacks, including on voluntary run ambulances that serve the Golders Green Community, we ask that the Government do more than offer what we feel are empty words of solidarity and shock. We believe our community needs a visible and permanent police presence that is on patrol 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. We feel closing police stations and reducing police patrols by foot and car play their part in creating a breeding ground where antisemitic attacks are more likely to take place.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":11481,"closing_date":"2026-10-29","created_at":"2026-03-23T14:47:41.201Z","updated_at":"2026-08-15T14:17:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-29T12:00:14.671Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-23T15:13:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-30T18:24:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-05T10:08:38.977Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Hannah Messham","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-08-03","summary":"On 13 July, we announced over £250m to increase policing in Jewish communities, in addition to the £25m announced in April. Operational decisions, such as 24/7 police patrols, are for police forces.","details":"On 13 July, the Government announced an uplift of £251.1 million to increase policing in Jewish communities, following a series of antisemitic attacks and the raising of the national terror threat level from Substantial to Severe. This will deliver over 500 FTE across England and Wales, boost police presence in Jewish neighbourhoods and around schools, synagogues and community centres, while strengthening national counter-terrorism capabilities.\n\nThis includes a further £86 million for the Metropolitan Police, which will fund around 300 additional personnel to support policing in Jewish communities in London. Over £22 million will go to Greater Manchester Police to sustain the enhanced policing response following the attack at Heaton Park last year. Around £43 million will be distributed across seven other forces with significant Jewish communities: Hertfordshire, Essex, Northumbria, Sussex, Thames Valley, West Midlands and West Yorkshire. This will provide a sustained and visible uplift in neighbourhood policing in these communities.\n\nThe package also provides £41 million for national policing coordination and increased antisemitism capabilities. This will fund antisemitism training for all officers in England and Wales, strengthen investigations and ensure surge resources are available to all forces to protect Jewish communities, wherever they live. Counter-Terrorism Policing will receive £59 million to bolster protective security and counter state threats. \n\nThis longer-term policing package builds on measures already announced to protect Jewish communities, including the £25 million package announced on 30 April following the Golders Green attack to bolster policing and protective security, and £33.4 million already committed in 2026-27 for protective security and Project Servator. \n\nThe April package included £20 million for increased police patrols, including £18 million for the Metropolitan Police Service and £2 million made available nationally through the National Police Chiefs’ Council. It also provided an additional £4 million for protective security at synagogues, Jewish educational establishments and other communal sites, and a further £1 million for Project Servator to expand the role of specialist and plain-clothes officers in communities trained to spot suspicious activity and deter crime.\n\nBy making this longer-term commitment, police forces will be able to deliver more high-visibility patrols and stronger local engagement in areas with significant Jewish populations, including around synagogues and schools over the next three years. Patrols will be increased at times of heightened vulnerability, offering visible reassurance and helping to deter hate crime and antisemitic incidents. Officers will also work more closely with Jewish communities through a permanent presence in significant Jewish communities across the country, strengthening relationships with representative groups and places of worship.\n\nThe Government will continue to work closely with policing and Jewish community stakeholders to ensure this investment delivers enhanced protection and reassurance for Jewish communities. The deployment of policing resources remains a decision for police forces, who are best placed to determine the workforce structures and operational model needed in their area. This includes determining how that permanent uplift in policing presence is delivered and whether 24/7 patrols are the most appropriate way to protect Jewish communities, alongside other measures such as visible patrols, local engagement, intelligence-led deployment, national surge resources and specialist capabilities. \n\nThe Government remains committed to rebuilding neighbourhood policing across England and Wales and restoring the vital link between police forces and the communities they serve. By the end of February 2026, forces had delivered more than 3,100 additional police officers and PCSOs into neighbourhood roles since March 2025, strengthening neighbourhood teams as part of our Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee to deliver 13,000 more by the end of this Parliament. Every neighbourhood has named, and contactable officers dedicated to providing visible policing and responding to community concerns. Forces have increased patrols in town centres and other key locations, acting on community intelligence, to prevent harm and tackle crime. \n\nHome Office\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response on the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765130)","created_at":"2026-06-05T10:08:38.967Z","updated_at":"2026-08-06T13:18:56.210Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":757502,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/757502.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce national support standards for autistic children with PDA","background":"We urge the Government to recognise the growing cohort of autistic children with a Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA) profile who are unable to attend school safely. ","additional_details":"We believe that in demand-heavy, compliance-led settings, they may face escalating crisis, including increased risk of self-harm and suicidal ideation.\r\n \r\nIn our view PDA is inconsistently supported across education, health and local authorities, resulting in many children experiencing preventable crisis. For some children, proximity to mainstream environments triggers crisis; without timely access to low-arousal or alternative learning pathways, risk increases. We ask the Government to strengthen partnerships through improved awareness of PDA-related needs, supported by training and accountability, so children are not required to fail first.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":18120,"closing_date":"2026-08-20","created_at":"2026-01-17T13:52:23.142Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T08:18:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-20T10:51:06.952Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-17T17:33:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-04-20T21:58:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-03T16:04:03.326Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Tatum Davis","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-03","summary":"New National Inclusion Standards will set out evidence informed approaches for educators to identify and support children with additional needs, including for autistic children with a PDA profile. ","details":"To ensure teachers can support children before needs escalate, we will develop National Inclusion Standards which will set out the evidence-informed tools, strategies and approaches for educators across the 0-25 system to draw on to identify and support children and young people with additional needs, including autistic children and young people who may have a Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA) profile.\n\nAccess to support should not be dependent on a child or young person having a diagnosis. Educators will be able to draw on the National Inclusion Standards to put in place evidence-based support as needs are identified.  \n\nWe will also introduce Specialist Provision Packages which will create a consistent, high-quality offer for children and young people with the most complex needs, which may include some autistic children with PDA, wherever they live.\n\nWe will appoint an independent panel of experts, selected for their skills, knowledge, and professional standing, and led by health and education co-chairs, to design the National Inclusion Standards and Specialist Provision Packages.\n\nBy 2028, we will have invested up to £15 million to strengthen the evidence base for the National Inclusion Standards, so support is effective for all types of need. \n\nNew government-backed research led by UK Research and Innovation will develop and test approaches to early identification, assessment and support that can be embedded in education settings nationwide. Together, these measures are intended to ensure that every child, including autistic children and young people, receive the right support at the right time, helping them to thrive both in education and beyond.\n\nFrom this year, schools will be held to account on the use of their inclusion funding in the form of an Inclusion Strategy. This will ensure schools are taking steps through evidence-based activities and approaches to embed inclusive practice. Ofsted will be able to draw on the strategy to assess how effectively leaders are planning for, implementing and delivering inclusive practice. \n\nWe will roll out a new national training programme supporting educators to identify and respond to children’s needs backed by £200 million investment, to train staff across nurseries, schools and colleges with the first wave of training materials coming online from September.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-06-03T16:04:03.323Z","updated_at":"2026-06-03T16:04:03.323Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":754292,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/754292.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund Free TV licences for all pensioners.","background":"We want the Government to fund free TV licences for existing pensioners and those who reach the official retirement age. When people reach retirement age, we think they should receive a state-financed free TV licence.","additional_details":"Many pensioners live on the breadline with only the TV for company. With the cost of food soaring and utility bills ever higher, we feel there is a desperate need to provide all pensioners with at least this concession.\r\n\r\nWe feel it is a double outrage that those who have given their all to this country in taxes and raising children have to pay a TV licence fee and are only exempt if they receive means-tested Pension Credit. Meanwhile, some media figures draw huge salaries.","committee_note":null,"state":"closed","signature_count":67060,"created_at":"2025-12-12T00:05:42.769Z","updated_at":"2026-07-22T17:42:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-21T11:34:05.619Z","closed_at":"2026-07-21T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-12T18:18:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-17T15:47:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-06-02T10:57:15.416Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-06-01","summary":"There are a number of TV licence concessions available, including for over-75s in receipt of pension credit. There is no BBC concession to provide free TV licences for all pensioners at this time.","details":"The Government believes that public service broadcasting, and the BBC in particular, are vital British assets that support our democracy, bring our communities together, and help to shape and define our nation through telling stories about the lives of people in all parts of the UK.\n\nTV Licence concessions are set out in legislation and are currently available to people who are registered blind or severely sight impaired, as well as to over-75s in receipt of pension credit, and people living in qualifying residential care who are disabled or over 60 years old. The Government is committed to the current licence fee and its available concessions for the remainder of this Charter period, until the end of 2027. \n\nWhile the Government strongly believes in public funding for the BBC given the public good it serves, we are aware of the financial difficulties faced by some households. For this reason, the Government announced a significant extension to the Simple Payment Plan (SPP) in 2024. This allows unlicensed households experiencing financial difficulty to split up the annual payment into more manageable fortnightly and monthly instalments. The BBC’s analysis suggests that the expansion could double the number of households using the SPP to around 500,000 by the end of 2027.\n\nMore broadly, the Government is absolutely committed to supporting pensioners and giving them the dignity and security they deserve in retirement. That is why, through our commitment to protect the Triple Lock, over 12 million pensioners will benefit. From the end of this Parliament, spending on the State Pension as a result of our commitment to protect the Triple Lock is forecast to be over £30 billion more a year, compared with 2024/25. This will see pensioners’ yearly incomes rising by up to £2,100. The basic and new State Pensions increased by 4.8% in April, benefitting over 12 million pensioners by up to £575.\n\nThrough the BBC Charter Review we are considering how we ensure the BBC is funded so that it can continue to deliver for all of us, drive the growth of the creative industries, nurture talent, and invest across the whole of the UK. The BBC’s own statistics show 94% of adults use the BBC each month yet fewer than 80% of households pay, contributing to an ongoing pressure on the BBC’s funding which includes the extent to which concessions are possible. The Government has been clear that any future funding model for the BBC should also be fair to audiences and ensure costs to households are kept as low as possible. The Government is keeping an open mind about the future of BBC funding and has not yet identified a preferred model. \n\nWe are also keeping an open mind about new concessions and are considering a range of options to better account for different household situations. As set out in the Charter Review Green Paper, we do not plan to remove any existing concessions. \n\nWe also do not plan to revisit the decision on over-75s licences as the BBC provides a concession for over-75s on pension credit which targets those most in need of support. It was estimated the cost of the TV licence concession for all over-75s could reach around £745 million per annum prior to its amendment in 2020.\n\nThe Government’s public consultation on the Green Paper, which asked people from different communities to be part of the conversation on the future of the BBC, closed on 10 March 2026. The Government is now considering the responses to the public consultation. These will inform policy decisions for the next BBC Royal Charter which will be set out in a White Paper, expected to be published later this year.\n\nDepartment for Culture, Media & Sport","created_at":"2026-06-02T10:57:15.412Z","updated_at":"2026-06-02T11:09:47.136Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":765400,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/765400.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Coeliac disease awareness training to be mandatory for all catering industries","background":"Government must require all staff working in a catering service to be provided with basic coeliac disease awareness training, to ensure a set standard of understanding & awareness around the importance of meal preparation & food serving to a person with Coeliac disease including cross-contamination.","additional_details":"Coeliac disease is a chronic autoimmune disorder where the ingestion of gluten - a protein found in wheat, barley and rye, triggers an immune response that can significantly damage the small intestines. I have come across many food industries, who offer gluten free options however, are unaware the importance to prepare this separately to avoid cross-contamination. Coeliac is not an allergy but is chronic disorder and should be taken as seriously as any allergy.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":15019,"closing_date":"2026-10-24","created_at":"2026-03-25T21:56:51.898Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T13:18:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-24T09:54:14.797Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-26T05:43:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-08T09:56:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-29T15:17:19.591Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Selina Wallace","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-29","summary":"The Government believes the current framework, supported by guidance and enforcement, provides proportionate protection, and has no plans to mandate coeliac training for catering staff.","details":"The Government believes that the existing regulatory framework, supported by guidance, training resources and local authority enforcement, provides proportionate and effective protection for people with coeliac disease, and has no plans currently to introduce mandatory coeliac disease awareness training for all catering staff.\n\nThe Government recognises the seriousness of coeliac disease and the importance of ensuring food is prepared and served safely for people who must avoid gluten. Coeliac disease is a lifelong autoimmune condition, and even small amounts of gluten can cause harm, including through cross contamination during food preparation.\n\nUnder UK law, food business operators must ensure that staff training is appropriate to the type of food handled, including high-risk foods such as those containing allergens or gluten. Food handlers must be supervised, instructed and/or trained in food hygiene matters commensurate with their work activities, in line with the Food Safety Act 1990 and Assimilated Regulation (EC) No 852/2004. Businesses must also comply with the Food Information Regulations 2014, which cover the provision of allergen information to consumers.\n\nWhile there is no standalone legal requirement for allergen specific or coeliac specific training, food businesses are required to have effective allergen management systems in place, including means to understand and control the risks of cross contamination. The responsibility for ensuring appropriate training sits with the food business operator, and local authorities assess its adequacy during inspections to ensure compliance with allergen management requirements. Local authorities are responsible for enforcing food safety and allergen legislation and are supported by the Food Standards Agency (FSA) in England, Wales and Northern Ireland through the Food Law Code of Practice, guidance, and enforcement tools.\n\nThe FSA supports food businesses in meeting their obligations through a wide range of guidance and tools. This includes free online food allergy and intolerance training, allergen guidance for food businesses, and technical guidance on food allergen labelling, all of which include considerations relevant to gluten free food and coeliac disease. The FSA also promotes best practice through targeted campaigns and resources, such as Safer Food Better Business (SFBB), which include guidance on allergen risks and cross-contact.\n\nIn March 2025, the FSA published best practice guidance on providing allergen information when eating out. It recommends that allergen information be provided in writing, supported by a verbal conversation with the customer. The guidance was developed with stakeholders including food businesses, local authorities, allergy charities and people with food hypersensitivities. An evaluation is planned for 2026 to assess its impact and inform future improvements, such as training and support for food businesses.\n\nAlthough gluten itself is not listed separately as one of the 14 regulated allergens, cereals containing gluten are included. Food businesses may voluntarily label products as ‘gluten-free’ if they meet the legal threshold of 20 parts per million or fewer. They must be able to verify such claims and manage cross-contamination risks so that food is safe for people with coeliac disease.\n\nThe Government will continue to keep allergen and food hypersensitivity policy under review in light of emerging evidence, evaluation findings, and ongoing engagement with stakeholders, including people with food hypersensitivities.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-05-29T15:17:19.588Z","updated_at":"2026-05-29T15:17:19.588Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":760061,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/760061.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban foreign media ownership, enact a social media levy & new regulatory reform","background":"Pass law to ban foreign & offshore ownership of UK media, enact a social-media levy to distribute media ownership across society & fund independent, local & cooperative-owned media. We believe democracy is failing as the media & political power are owned by a tiny rich elite.","additional_details":"We also call the Government to introduce new regulatory reforms, including requiring all media in the UK to be members of a statutory regulator and requiring media-covered think-tanks to report donations in real time. We believe we need to take back control of media ownership for the British people and that media should be free from offshore ownership and think tanks who accept dark money. Media ownership should reflect ALL of society not just the rich.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":26396,"closing_date":"2026-09-18","created_at":"2026-02-05T09:23:48.466Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T14:16:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-03-18T16:44:26.729Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-05T15:47:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-11T16:58:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-26T10:47:11.787Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Donnachadh McCarthy","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-26","summary":"The Government is committed to supporting a free and fair press. The media mergers regime bans foreign state influence and ownership. There are no current plans for a statutory press regulator.","details":"The Foreign State Influence (FSI) media merger regime prevents foreign powers controlling, influencing or owning UK newspapers. It includes a mechanism for the DCMS Secretary of State to block or unwind transactions which would enable a foreign power to influence or control a UK newspaper.\n\nThe regime is not intended to prevent any and all inward investment in the sector from overseas, which would be disproportionate. However, it is proportionate to have specific protections for newspapers, due to the unique role they play in our democracy and society. The accurate provision of news is essential to inform debate and opinion and support social cohesion. \n\nThe Government recognises challenges to the sustainability of the local news sector, including smaller independent publishers, and is taking steps to support it through the Local Media Action Plan. A key pillar of the Plan is a Local News Fund, worth up to £12million in the next 2 years, which will help local media outlets digitally innovate and revive a local news presence in local news deserts. \n\nA social media levy is not currently under consideration as a mechanism for funding distribution of media ownership. The existing Digital Services Tax (DST) is a 2 percent tax to ensure that providers of search engines, social media platforms, and online marketplaces pay UK tax on digital services that reflects the value they derive from UK user-related activities. DST was introduced as an interim solution to the challenges posed by the digitalisation of the economy to the international corporate tax framework.\n\nThere are currently no plans to introduce a statutory regulator for the UK press. In the UK there is a self-regulatory system for the press, which is independent from Government. Having a free and fair press is vital to ensure the public has access to accurate and trustworthy information from a range of different sources. To protect this freedom, the Government does not intervene in or oversee the work of the press or the independent press regulators.\n\nWe are also clear that with this freedom comes responsibility, and publishers must operate within the bounds of the law and set and uphold high professional and ethical standards. This includes ensuring access to clear, timely and effective routes to redress.\n\nRegarding think tanks, it is for each individual think tank to determine whether to declare its sources of funding. Think tanks with charitable status must follow Charity Commission guidance, ensuring political activity remains subsidiary and exclusively furthers their charitable purposes. Electoral law already covers think tanks that donate or spend during regulated election periods.\n\nThe Government welcomes Philip Rycroft’s comprehensive and thoughtful report on foreign financial interference in our democracy. The review sets out 17 wide-ranging recommendations to tackle foreign financial interference in the UK’s political and electoral systems, and the Government will reflect swiftly on how best to take these forward, given their technical nature. A full written response will be provided in due course. \n\nDepartment for Culture, Media and Sport","created_at":"2026-05-26T10:47:11.784Z","updated_at":"2026-05-26T10:47:11.784Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":764402,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/764402.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Deport all foreign-born criminals & individuals on the terror watchlist","background":"Deport all foreign-born criminals and individuals currently on the terror watchlist to their countries of origin with effect immediately.","additional_details":"We believe the British people do not need to pay for this, and in an ever-changing World, should not be subjected to having these people as neighbours.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":14056,"closing_date":"2026-10-27","created_at":"2026-03-15T16:58:16.561Z","updated_at":"2026-08-17T14:16:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-04-27T09:55:42.217Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-22T10:54:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-05-03T22:29:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-05-26T08:30:02.370Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"debate_scheduled_on":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Alexander Bhagat","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-05-22","summary":"The Government is determined to deport all foreign national offenders. Deportation will be used, against them and those whose deportation is otherwise considered to be conducive to the public good.","details":"The Government is clear foreign nationals who abuse our hospitality by committing crimes should be in no doubt of our determination to deport them.  Under the UK Borders Act 2007, a deportation order must be made where a foreign national has been convicted of an offence and received a custodial sentence of at least 12 months. This includes suspended sentences. This duty is subject to several exceptions, including where to do so would breach a person’s rights under the European Convention on Human Rights or the UK’s obligations under the Refugee Convention. \n\nWhere the threshold for deportation under the UK Borders Act 2007 is not met, deportation is considered under the Immigration Act 1971 on the ground it is conducive to the public good.  This includes where a foreign national has a conviction for an offence that caused serious harm, if they are a persistent offender or if they pose a threat to national security. \n\nA deportation order prevents an individual from lawfully re-entering the UK whilst it remains in force. \n\nThe Home Office uses various tools (including domestic and international watchlists) to detect and disrupt travel by terrorists, criminals, those previously deported or excluded from the UK and individuals using lost, stolen or revoked documents and visas. The Home Office works with both law enforcement and wider government partners to ensure appropriate action is taken before travel or at the border when individuals of concern are identified. \n\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-05-26T08:30:02.368Z","updated_at":"2026-05-26T08:30:44.239Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}}]}