{"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=6&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":731497,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/731497.json"},"attributes":{"action":"New Disclosure and Safeguarding Mechanism for At-Risk Children","background":"We propose a statutory safeguarding framework that facilitates proactive information sharing where a child is at risk due to a parent or caregiver’s known history, even when current laws may not trigger disclosure.","additional_details":"•            Introduce a Child Risk Disclosure Scheme (CRDS) that operates similarly to Clare’s and Sarah’s Laws but is focused on the broader risk history of caregivers.\r\n•            Require statutory services (police, social care, health) to disclose relevant past history to the child’s parent or legal guardian when a risk is identified.\r\n•            Establish multi-agency response protocols, particularly where child contact, custody, or unsupervised access is being considered.\r\n•            Empower professionals to raise safeguarding alerts and initiate family court safeguarding interventions where known risks exist, even if not currently under active investigation.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":110028,"created_at":"2025-06-25T12:14:57.544Z","updated_at":"2026-02-06T17:15:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-05T09:20:41.352Z","closed_at":"2026-02-05T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-25T14:07:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-16T20:18:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-07T08:16:31.248Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-30T07:36:30.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-07","summary":"We are delivering significant reform across children’s social care, policing and the family court system to better safeguard children and stop them falling through the cracks of services.","details":"Keeping children safe is a priority for this government, and this is why we are delivering the most significant overhaul of children’s social care in a generation. We deeply sympathise with calls to more effectively safeguard children and we recognise that fostering a culture of proactive information sharing amongst safeguarding professionals is critical to the early identification of need and risk, hence the facilitation of better support provision to prevent escalation. \r\n\r\nThrough our landmark Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we have set out to improve multi-agency information sharing, introduce a responsive family help system, and sharpen the child protection system. These reforms, taken together, are intended to better safeguard children, and stop them from falling through the cracks. \r\n\r\nIt is only when safeguarding partners have a fuller understanding of a child that they can effectively assess risk and take the most appropriate action. Rightly, the proposed Child Risk Disclosure Scheme highlights the importance of empowering and encouraging safeguarding practitioners to proactively share information relevant to a safeguarding concern, including where information relates to a risk posed by another person in a child’s life. Whilst the Government is not minded to introduce the elements of a Child Risk Disclosure Scheme requiring police to disclose information to parents and guardians, proposals to strengthen multi agency responses and earlier safeguarding help are already included in the package of reforms we are taking forward.\r\n\r\nWe are introducing a new Information Sharing Duty as set out in clause 4 of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. By legally obliging statutory safeguarding partners to share information across agencies where there is a concern relevant to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children, we are ending misconceptions about when information can and cannot be shared. Crucially, this extends to the sharing of information about other individuals for the same purpose, enabling practitioners to act and inform families as appropriate.\r\n\r\nWe are also exploring means of reducing friction in sharing information across agencies through technological improvements. This includes delivering on our manifesto commitment to introduce a consistent identifier for children, to allow data to be shared more efficiently and accurately by linking records together to improve join-up across services.\r\n\r\nOnce needs are identified, our wider reforms will ensure children and families receive the appropriate support. Through the Families First Partnership Programme, we are committed to delivering the national rollout of Family Help – a new model of responsive early support that places children and families at the centre of its design, intended to prevent problems from escalating. \r\n\r\nWhere need does escalate, or concerns are of a greater gravity, we are sharpening the child protection system and ensuring strong multi-agency protocols on a local level through the introduction of Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams. These will bring experts together across agencies to better identify cases where children are suffering, or are at risk of suffering, significant harm. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill places a duty on safeguarding partners to implement this on a local level, alongside measures to strengthen the role of education and childcare settings in safeguarding arrangements.\r\n\r\nAlongside reforms to children’s social care and in recognition of the impact domestic abuse has on children, we introduced Operation Encompass in November 2025. This is a statutory duty that requires police to notify a child’s education setting where they have attended a domestic abuse incident in a child’s home, regardless of if they were present.\r\n\r\nRegarding multi-agency protocols where child contact and custody are being considered, we affirm that the welfare of children is the paramount concern in family court proceedings. Established risk assessments and multi-agency safeguarding arrangements are already in place and we are taking a step further by delivering a package of reforms to the family court to enhance safeguarding of, and support for children. This includes our decision to repeal the presumption of parental involvement from the Children Act 1989, and our work to expand the private law Pathfinder model, which promotes safeguarding through multi-agency collaboration, early identification of risk and expert support in cases involving domestic abuse. \r\n\r\nThrough these reforms, we hope to bring about fundamental change – to lay the foundations for a system that is responsive, champions professional curiosity, keeps children safe and helps families thrive. We will continue to consider where we can go further to strengthen safeguarding arrangements and encourage good practice on a local level, either through future legislation or the implementation of these measures. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-01-07T08:16:31.246Z","updated_at":"2026-01-07T08:16:31.246Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":750236,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/750236.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not merge section 1 & 2 regulations on firearms licenses","background":"Keep section 1 firearm & section 2 shotgun licensing separate. I think this would help to protect law-abiding owners, the shooting industry, & rural communities. Policies should focus on real public safety issues without burdening responsible citizens or damaging heritage & livelihoods.","additional_details":"I want Parliament to keep Section 1 and 2 licensing separate. I think this would help to protect law-abiding owners, the shooting trade, and rural communities. I think merging licenses would create delays, higher costs, and bureaucracy without improving public safety. Policies should focus on what I think are more real threats like illegal weapons and knife crime, while helping to preserve heritage, livelihoods, and participation in shooting sports.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":122210,"created_at":"2025-11-10T13:58:45.843Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:06:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-11T12:12:43.647Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-10T14:36:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-12T00:41:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-06T16:27:15.717Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-21T21:48:30.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-23","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:22:38.626Z","creator_name":"Lisa Amers","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-06","summary":"The Government has committed to a public consultation on strengthening licensing controls on shotguns. We will consider all views submitted during the consultation before deciding on further action. ","details":"The Government recognises that shotguns and firearms are used for a range of legitimate purposes, such as target shooting and hunting, and the vast majority are used safely and responsibly. We also recognise that shooting contributes to the rural economy.\r\n\r\nThe Government is, however, mindful that legally held shotguns have been used in a number of homicides and other incidents in recent years including the fatal shootings in Keyham, Plymouth, in August 2021.  It is for this reason that we committed to having a public consultation on strengthening the licensing controls on shotguns, to bring them more into line with controls on other firearms in the interests of public safety.  We announced this on 13 February 2025 when we published the Government response to the 2023 firearms licensing consultation which had been run by the previous Government.  \r\n\r\nRecommendations relating to strengthening shotgun controls had been made to the Government by the Coroner in his preventing future deaths report issued in May 2023 and followed the inquest into the deaths of those who were shot and killed in Plymouth in August 2021. Similar recommendations on shotgun controls were also made in the report by the Independent Office for Police Conduct following its investigation into the Plymouth shootings, and by the Scottish Affairs Committee in its report following a fatal shooting with a shotgun in Skye in August 2022.  \r\n\r\nWe intend to publish the consultation shortly.  No decisions have yet been made on whether and what changes might be necessary. We will consider carefully the views put forward during the consultation once it is completed, before deciding what further action to take. We will also provide an impact assessment in relation to any changes that the Government intends to bring forward after the consultation, in the normal way.     \r\n\r\nPublic safety is our priority, and our focus on shotguns and other firearms sits alongside the Government’s aim to halve knife crime in the next decade, which forms a part of the Government’s Safer Street Mission.  We are driving an ambitious programme of work focusing on prevention and enforcement, as well as strengthening knife legislation.  This includes banning weapons that have no place on our streets, targeting irresponsible sellers, giving the police more powers to deal with those supplying and owning weapons for violent purposes, intervening earlier to stop young people being drawn into crime, and bringing together experts through the Knife-Enabled Robbery Taskforce and the Coalition to Tackle Knife Crime.\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2026-01-06T16:27:15.714Z","updated_at":"2026-01-06T16:27:15.714Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-23","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-23/debates/7FA45CF2-9295-474B-9597-FA185FE366AF/FirearmsLicensing","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/fURXLFk0e7Q","debate_pack_url":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746353,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746353.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Allow charities to rescue dogs with docked tails under the Animal Welfare Bill","background":"We ask Parliament to include an exemption in the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Bill for registered charities and approved, responsible rescue organisations to rehome adult, disease tested dogs, who were previously docked as working hunting dogs abroad.","additional_details":"Without an exemption, we can no longer rescue Italian Spinoni, and organisations cannot help many other working breeds like pointers, spaniels and griffons.\r\n \r\nThese dogs have sadly lost their tails, docked for working purposes, not fashion, and are often treated abroad as disposable hunting tools. We support this Bill and ask to help improve it in crafting legislation that protects welfare while preventing loopholes. Please involve us, and let us continue to help these dogs.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":22849,"created_at":"2025-10-10T09:56:09.952Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T10:01:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-17T14:33:36.068Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-07T20:05:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.899Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Sarah-Jane Newton","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-06","summary":"We will work with stakeholders to consider appropriate exemptions as we deliver the relevant regulations. Exemptions will need to be finely balanced against the risk of creating loopholes.","details":"As outlined in our manifesto, the government is committed to ending puppy smuggling. That is why we were pleased to support the Animal Welfare (Import of Dogs, Cats and Ferrets) Act 2025.\r\n\r\nThe Act will close loopholes in the non-commercial pet travel rules that are abused by unscrupulous traders. It also gives the government powers to prevent the supply of low-welfare pets to the United Kingdom. This includes the power to make regulations prohibiting dogs and cats being brought into Great Britain with non-exempted mutilations, such as docked tails and cropped ears, and the power to specify appropriate exemptions in future regulations. \r\n\r\nThese prohibitions and any appropriate exemptions will be delivered via secondary legislation at a later date. We will continue to work with stakeholders and consider their feedback – for example, on the impact of the regulations on rescue and rehoming – to help shape these exemptions. The government is clear, however, that any exemptions to these measures will need to be finely balanced against the risk of creating loopholes that could be exploited by bad actors.\r\n\r\nIn the meantime, owners and importers can find up to date guidance on bringing dogs to Great Britain on the gov.uk website, available at: https://www.gov.uk/bring-pet-to-great-britain.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural ","created_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.896Z","updated_at":"2026-01-06T14:15:01.896Z"},"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":747234,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/747234.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Remove power to cancel local government elections\r\n","background":"Change the law to remove the power of the Secretary of State to cancel any further forthcoming local government, metropolitan borough, London borough or any other elections, for example, but not limited to, those due in May 2026.","additional_details":"Ever since 1918, the right to vote is sacred and inalienable. 2025 Elections in some areas were cancelled this year. We believe any further cancellations would be voter suppression and undemocratic. The will of the people of the nation must be heard.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":153287,"created_at":"2025-10-17T13:47:26.613Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:56:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-25T09:23:40.451Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-17T14:29:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-04T13:21:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-06T14:04:16.696Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-12T07:31:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:19:41.848Z","creator_name":"Dr Chris Barnes","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-05","summary":"The Secretary of State’s powers in this area are set out in legislation made by Parliament and used only with strong justification. The Government has no plans to amend these powers.","details":"Parliament has conferred powers on the Secretary of State to postpone local elections under the Local Government Act 2000. While these powers sit with the Secretary of State, Parliament retains an oversight role through the statutory instrument process, ensuring democratic accountability. These powers are used infrequently.\r\n\r\nMost recently they were used in February 2025 when a statutory instrument was made to postpone the ordinary local elections due to take place in May 2025 in East Sussex, Essex, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Norfolk, Suffolk, Surrey, Thurrock and West Sussex. The instrument was made using statutory powers, laid before Parliament and debated and voted on by both Houses. The accompanying Explanatory Memorandum to the 2025 statutory instrument sets out the reasons for the decision: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2025/137/pdfs/uksiem_20250137_en_001.pdf\r\n\r\nOn 18 December 2025, the Minister for Local Government and Homelessness updated Parliament (https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2025-12-18/hcws1215) that she had written to councils going through local government reorganisation that have elections scheduled for May 2026. She invited council leaders to set out their views on the postponement of local elections in their area and if they consider that postponement would release essential capacity to deliver local government reorganisation. No decisions have been made at this stage; all evidence and representations will be considered individually before any final decision. Any subsequent legislation would be subject to Parliament. The majority of local elections in 2026 are unaffected by local government reorganisation.\r\n\r\nParliament has also conferred powers on the Secretary of State to implement proposals for unitary local government under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. These powers include provision for electoral matters. Again, while these powers sit with the Secretary of State, Parliament retains an oversight role through the statutory instrument process, ensuring democratic accountability. When these powers are used, it is typical to provide for elections to the new councils and to cancel any scheduled elections to predecessor councils that otherwise would take place at the same time. We have set out our intention to use these powers to implement the proposal for two new unitary councils in Surrey. We will bring to the House, for approval, a Structural Changes Order, which will establish East Surrey Council and West Surrey Council.\r\n\r\nOn December 4 2025, the Government announced it is minded to hold the inaugural mayoral elections for Sussex and Brighton, Hampshire and the Solent, Norfolk and Suffolk, and Greater Essex in May 2028, so that areas will have completed the local government reorganisation, and establish the strategic authority before mayors take office. This is because devolution is strongest when it is built on strong foundations and moving forward we will want to ensure strong unitary structures are in place before areas access mayoral devolution.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2026-01-06T14:04:16.694Z","updated_at":"2026-01-06T14:11:15.451Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-02/debates/7B0237DD-38DA-4B1B-88B1-5D5CE04FB352/PowerToCancelLocalElections","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxSHRnfUDVU","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10507/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MHCLG","name":"Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housing-communities-local-government"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":737923,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/737923.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Strengthen regulation of supported accommodations","background":"I want all supported accommodations to be monitored by the Care Quality Commission, and to be inspected and rated, to protect people.","additional_details":"We believe too many vulnerable adults are being taken advantage of due to the private companies setting up these supported accommodations. These companies are being awarded vast amounts of money and we believe that in many cases vulnerable adults that have no family to speak up for them are being left to stagnate in their accommodation, while the companies take their support money are offering limited support. This is happening because no one is there to check up on the accommodation appropriately.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":56169,"created_at":"2025-08-16T07:54:50.900Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:52:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-17T16:14:13.045Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-16T08:26:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-01T12:20:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-19T17:22:15.105Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Emma lloyd-buckingham","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-19","summary":"The government requires that care and support provided within all supported housing meet the highest standards. Statutory provisions are in place to ensure these standards are upheld.","details":"The government is clear that all supported housing should provide high quality accommodation, be well managed, and that all residents including vulnerable adults should get the support they need to enable them to be as independent as possible.\r\n\r\nThe government is tackling poor quality supported housing to ensure that residents get the care and support they need and is committed to the improvements set out in the Supported Housing (Regulatory Oversight) Act 2023 (the Act). The Act was enacted to address gaps in regulation and establish a regulatory baseline to prevent exploitation in the sector, ensuring that all providers deliver safe, adequate housing and necessary support services.\r\n\r\nThe Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government consulted on proposals for implementing the measures set out in the Act between February and May 2025, including on a proposal to link the payment of higher rates of Housing Benefit to licensing in England. We are working to issue the government response to the consultation as soon as possible.\r\n\r\nThe Act will give local authorities the power to challenge rogue landlords and protect residents through local licensing schemes. New Standards for the support provided to residents will also be introduced.\r\n\r\nThe Act also introduces a duty on local authorities to produce supported housing strategies which will help local authorities to identify areas of need for supported housing and make their own local commissioning decisions.\r\n\r\nUnder the Health and Social Care Act 2008, providers of health and adult social care services must, by law, register with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) if they carry out a regulated activity. If they carry out a regulated activity without being registered, they may be prosecuted and liable to pay a fine.\r\n\r\nIt is a provider’s responsibility to make sure that they are correctly registered to carry out the services they provide. Most supported living and extra care housing services require the provider to be registered for the regulated activity ‘Personal care’. For this to apply there must be separate legal agreements for the accommodation and the personal care. In some cases, they may need to be registered for the regulated activity ‘Accommodation for persons requiring nursing or personal care’. The difference will depend upon the contractual arrangements in place for the delivery of the care and of the housing. Generally speaking, where there are separate legal agreements for the accommodation and for the personal care, CQC register and regulate only the personal care provider and not the accommodation service provider.\r\n\r\nCQC have published guidance on supported living schemes/supported living accommodation on their website here: https://www.cqc.org.uk/sites/default/files/20151023_provider_guidance-housing_with_care.pdf. Page 15 of the guidance has a flow chart explaining when a supported living provider would need to register with CQC.\r\n\r\nWhere safeguarding is concerned, any form of abuse or neglect is unacceptable. The government makes it clear, in statutory guidance of the Care Act, that local authorities must ensure that the services they commission are safe, effective, and of high quality.\r\n\r\nWhere a local authority has reasonable cause to suspect that an adult in the local authority’s area has needs for care and support and appears to be at risk of, or experiencing, abuse or neglect, and is unable to protect themselves as a result of those needs, the local authority must carry out a safeguarding enquiry. The purpose of an enquiry should be to establish if any safeguarding action is required, and if so, what and by whom. Regulated providers also have a key role in safeguarding adults. All staff are subject to employer checks and controls, and employers must satisfy themselves regarding the skills and competence of their staff.\r\n\r\nThe CQC monitors how well providers are safeguarding service users. As part of their regulatory regime the CQC checks that care providers have effective systems to help keep adults safe from abuse and neglect. Where anyone alleges poor care, neglect or abuse, we expect those providing the service, local authorities and the CQC to take swift action.\r\n\r\nThe CQC also assesses whether local authorities are meeting their duties under Part 1 of the Care Act 2014, identifying any strengths or areas for improvement, sharing good practice and enabling the Department of Health and Social Care to target support where it’s most needed. If the CQC identifies a local authority has failed or is failing to discharge its duties under the Care Act to an acceptable standard, for instance on the suitability of living accommodation, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has powers to intervene.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-12-19T17:22:15.103Z","updated_at":"2025-12-19T17:22:15.103Z"},"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":748695,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/748695.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Hold an inquiry into CAMHS and NHS children’s mental health delays","background":"Establish an inquiry into reported failures in CAMHS and NHS delays affecting children’s mental health, school attendance, and welfare outcomes.","additional_details":"Many children face long waits for CAMHS and NHS mental health support, which can leave families without help and pupils unable to attend school. Access to care and GP prescribing of SSRIs can vary by postcode, which can create unfair treatment gaps. These failures can harm education and drive rising welfare costs. EHCP's are also being affected as we feel the H (Health) parts are not being addressed. This can cause further costs to cash strapped local authorities. An inquiry is needed now.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":32338,"created_at":"2025-10-30T19:11:07.016Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:19:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-03T10:58:51.707Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-30T20:54:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-08T04:54:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-19T16:09:23.237Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Thomas Tunney","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-19","summary":"The Government has no current plans to establish an inquiry. Multiple actions are in place to improve and reform NHS mental health services and provide children with timely access to appropriate care.","details":"The nation’s mental health has deteriorated over the past decade. Lord Darzi’s investigation highlighted that people accessing NHS mental health services — including children and young people — face long waits, variable quality of care and persistent inequalities.\r\n\r\nThis Government has already taken important steps to stabilise and improve mental health services, but we recognise that much more needs to be done. Transforming the system will take time, but we are committed to delivering a fundamentally new approach to mental health care.\r\n\r\nProgress is already being made. In the first 12 months of this Government, nearly 40,000 more children and young people accessed NHS mental health support compared with the previous year. This has been supported by the recruitment of over 7,000 additional mental health workers since July 2024, putting us on track to meet our target of 8,500 by the end of this Parliament.\r\n\r\nWe are also investing in innovation and evidence-based improvement. Since July 2024, more than £100 million has been awarded through National Institute for Health and Care Research mental health research programmes to improve treatments and care pathways. This includes £1.5 million awarded in October to 17 innovative health technology projects aimed at reducing waiting times for children and young people.\r\n\r\nThe NHS 10 Year Health Plan sets out an ambitious programme of reform to make the NHS fit for the future. Building on this, we will go further to ensure mental health services consistently deliver timely, high-quality care. It is clear that ‘more of the same’ will not suffice. We will continue to reform how mental health support is delivered, reducing waits, improving quality and embedding a whole-of-society approach focused on prevention and early intervention.\r\n\r\nBy spring 2026, up to 900,000 additional children and young people will have access to an NHS-funded Mental Health Support Team in their school or college. As part of our shift from treatment to prevention, we will accelerate rollout to achieve full national coverage by 2029. We will also strengthen workforce capability to better support young people with complex needs, including trauma, neurodivergence and disordered eating. To support this, we are investing £13 million to pilot enhanced staff training, informing future phases of the programme.\r\n\r\nOn 15 July, the Prime Minister set out plans to open 50 Young Futures Hubs over the next four years. Hubs will bring together services to improve access to opportunities and support for young people at community level, promoting positive outcomes and enabling them to thrive. The first eight Young Futures Hubs will launch by the end of this financial year, backed by a £2 million investment and targeted in areas with high levels of crime and antisocial behaviour, offering a lifeline to vulnerable young people. Work with these early adopters will inform the longer-term development of the programme, including how quickly we move to a greater number of hubs. We will set out more details in due course.\r\n\r\nThe Medium Term Planning Framework sets out how reforms from the 10 Year Health Plan will be delivered, including reducing the longest waits for children and young people’s community mental health services, improving productivity and tackling local inequalities and unwarranted variation in access.\r\n\r\nAlongside this, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has launched an independent review into the prevalence of, and support for, mental health conditions, ADHD and autism. We are deeply concerned that too many adults, children and young people have been let down by services and are not receiving timely or appropriate support.\r\n\r\nThe review will inform our future approach to mental health, ensuring people receive the right support, at the right time and in the right place. It will also shape how we support people with ADHD and autistic people to live well in their communities. The review will examine prevalence, early intervention, treatment pathways and the challenges facing clinical services, as well as the evidence on diagnosis, medicalisation and outcomes.\r\n\r\nIt will also identify opportunities for alternative models of support and pathways, both within and beyond the NHS, that strengthen prevention and early intervention alongside clinical care. The review will be led by Professor Peter Fonagy, supported by vice-chairs Professor Sir Simon Wessely and Professor Gillian Baird, and guided by an Advisory Working Group of academics, clinicians, charities, epidemiological experts and people with lived experience.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-12-19T16:09:23.235Z","updated_at":"2025-12-19T16:09:23.235Z"},"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":744237,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/744237.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make it an offence to carry a catapult in public without lawful defence","background":"Change the law so catapult possession in public is an offence. Currently, police must prove intent or use to cause harm. We propose it becomes an absolute offence, like air rifles, without lawful defence. Rising attacks on people, animals, and wildlife show stronger powers are needed.","additional_details":"Catapults are increasingly linked to assaults, criminal damage, and rising wildlife attacks. Making public possession an absolute offence like air rifles with age checks, and a licensing scheme for legitimate uses like angling, would give police stronger powers.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":39205,"created_at":"2025-09-29T11:28:19.203Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:39:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-23T14:17:08.000Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-29T12:53:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-27T18:35:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.202Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Christopher Smith","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-16","summary":"There are laws that can already be used against individuals who use catapults as a weapon, but the Government understands the concerns and is actively looking at this issue.","details":"The Government shares the concerns raised by the petitioners over the misuse of catapults, whether against people, property or wildlife.\r\n\r\nThere are a wide range of laws in place to punish those who misuse catapults. For example, under the Prevention of Crime Act 1953, if a person carries an offensive weapon in a public place or threatens a person with an offensive weapon, they may face up to 4 years in prison. An offensive weapon is defined as any article made or adapted for use for causing injury to the person or intended by the person having it with him for such use by him or by another person. The definition may include a catapult depending on the circumstances and facts of the case. \r\n\r\nWhere a catapult is used to harm a person, under the Offences against the Person Act 1861, it could be charged as assault occasioning actual bodily harm which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years’ imprisonment, However, depending on the gravity of the attack and the seriousness of the injury caused by the catapult, the offence of wounding or causing grievous bodily harm with intent could be committed, which carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. \r\n\r\nUnder the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996, the police have powers to deal with offences concerning deliberate attempts to kill, injure or inflict harm on wildlife, and this would include cases where catapults have been used. It is also an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increases the sentences available to our courts for the most serious cases of animal cruelty to, for example, pets and livestock by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.\r\n\r\nThe Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 also provides the police, local authorities and other local agencies with a range of tools and powers that they can use to respond to anti-social behaviour including that involving catapults. This includes Community Protection Warnings and Notices (CPWs and CPNs), and Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) which can be used to prevent behaviour that is having, or likely to have, a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality. Through the Crime and Policing Bill we will also ensure that the police, local authorities, and other agencies have the tools and powers they need to deal with persistent anti-social behaviour and crime that is plaguing our communities. This includes increasing the maximum penalty for breach of a CPN or PSPO from £100 to £500, and the introduction of Respect Orders. Respect Orders will enable courts to ban adult offenders from engaging in harmful anti-social behaviours. This could, for example, see offenders banned from entering certain public places, where they have been behaving anti-socially.  \r\n\r\nThis Government is focussed on putting neighbourhood policing at the heart of plans to reform policing, to both enforce existing laws and those that this Government is bringing forward. The Government has committed to delivering an additional 13,000 police officers, PCSOs and special constables in neighbourhood policing roles by the end of this Parliament and made £200 million available this year to support the first steps towards delivering this significant boost to neighbourhood policing.  \r\n\r\nThe Home Office is providing funding this financial year for the National Rural Crime Unit as well as continuing its funding for the National Wildlife Crime Unit. This will help the units tackle those crimes that predominantly affect our rural communities.\r\n\r\nThere are a range of offences and powers that can therefore be used to prevent the misuse of catapults, but the Government is aware of continuing concerns about the problems caused by catapults. We are actively considering what more might be done, especially around enforcement. \r\n\r\nWe do not intend to accept the petitioners’ proposal at this time. However, public safety is a Government priority, and in view of the continuing concerns, we are actively looking at what more can be done to address the misuse of catapults.\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.199Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T15:52:10.199Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":740671,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/740671.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce new tax code for state pensioners with double the personal allowance","background":"We want the government to introduce a new tax code for state pensioners, set at double the basic threshold. If this was implemented, pensioners would receive a higher tax-exempt limit, but wealthier pensioners would still pay tax.","additional_details":"We think that people with small private or workplace pensions are currently being taxed unfairly.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":115980,"created_at":"2025-09-10T14:25:57.624Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:33:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-01T12:27:17.567Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-10T23:20:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-15T15:18:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-09T17:56:16.659Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-11T22:53:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Timothy Hugh Mason","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-09","summary":"The State Pension is the foundation of support for pensioners. The Government is committed to a fair tax system but doubling the Personal Allowance for pensioners would be untargeted and costly.","details":"The State Pension is the foundation of support available to pensioners. The government is committed to the Triple Lock – one of the most generous State Pension uprating mechanisms in the world – for the duration of this Parliament. This will increase the basic and new State Pension by 4.8% next April, boosting pensioner incomes by up to £575 a year and strengthening retirement security. \r\n\r\nThe Personal Allowance is already the highest amongst G7 countries. Doubling this allowance for all pensioners would be costly and untargeted – disproportionately benefitting higher income pensioners.\r\n\r\nAs announced at the Budget, the government will ease the administrative burden for pensioners whose sole income is the basic or new State Pension without any increments so that they do not have to pay small amounts of tax via Simple Assessment from 2027-28, if the new or basic State Pension exceeds the Personal Allowance from that point. The government is exploring the best way to achieve this and will set out more detail next year.\r\n\r\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2025-12-09T17:56:16.656Z","updated_at":"2025-12-09T17:56:16.656Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":741677,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/741677.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make impersonating military service/wearing unearned medals a criminal offence","background":"I want Parliament to make it a criminal offence for anyone to dishonestly claim to have served in the Armed Forces, or to wear military uniforms or medals they are not entitled to wear.","additional_details":"Serving in the Armed Forces is an honour involving sacrifice and service to our country. When people falsely claim to have served or wear uniforms and medals they have not earned, they disrespect genuine veterans and mislead the public. Current laws only cover fraud for financial gain or limited cases of unauthorised uniform use. A new offence is needed to protect the integrity of service and uphold respect for veterans.","committee_note":null,"state":"open","signature_count":16601,"created_at":"2025-09-18T18:42:13.659Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T07:55:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-07T16:03:31.299Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-18T19:03:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-19T18:55:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-09T11:14:14.173Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Andrew Matthews","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-09","summary":"There are currently no plans for the government to introduce additional criminal offences for impersonation of military service or wearing unearned medals.","details":"The term ‘Stolen Valour’ is emotive and is most commonly associated with individuals wearing medals that they have not earned or been awarded. In some cases, this appears to be veterans who are enhancing their own service record, in other cases it may be individuals who have no military service at all.  On some occasions, such behaviours may be associated with an attempt to deliberately defraud others for personal gain.\r\n\r\nServing personnel, Armed Forces veterans, and the public, are expected to adhere to the relevant laws and internal guidance regarding the wearing of medals. However, it is not currently a specific criminal offence for veterans, or the public, to wear medals to which they are not entitled.\r\n\r\nIt is an offence for a person not serving in His Majesty’s armed forces to wear the uniform of one of those forces without permission. The Uniforms Act 1894 also prevents the wearing of any dress having the appearance, or bearing any regimental or distinctive marks, of any such uniform. This does not, however, prevent individuals wearing a uniform for the purposes of a stage play or similar performance.\r\n\r\nThe Fraud Act 2006 (and common law fraud offences in Scotland) makes it an offence for someone to fraudulently wear uniforms or medals, or to pretend to be, or have been, in the Armed Forces, if it amounts to false representation for financial gain to themselves, or to disadvantage another person. This offence carries a sentence of up to 10 years’ imprisonment.\r\n\r\nWhere it is suspected that an individual maybe wearing a medal, or uniform, to which they are not entitled, in an attempt to defraud others, it is a matter for investigation by either the civil police, or the service police if the individual is subject to service law. In such cases, the MOD may be asked to provide information relating to an individual’s service record. \r\n\r\nSince 2009, it has not been a specific service law offence for an individual to wear medals or decorations that they were never awarded. This change in the law was a result of the enactment of the Armed Forces Act 2006, which repealed section 197 of the Army Act 1955 and section 197 of the Air Force Act 1955, in which the offence was specified. \r\n\r\nThe MOD’s official position is that only those who were awarded medals are entitled to wear them. This applies to Service Persons under Joint Service Publication (JSP) 761, at para 12.25, but it does not extend to members of the public as it is an internal policy only. \r\n\r\nMinistry of Defence","created_at":"2025-12-09T11:14:14.171Z","updated_at":"2025-12-09T11:14:14.171Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoD","name":"Ministry of Defence","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-defence"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728011,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728011.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require drivers to stop and take cats to the vets if they hit them in their car","background":"We want the government to make it law that if you hit a cat you must legally report it and take it to the nearest vets.","additional_details":"I have recently had my pet cat run over and he was killed.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10959,"created_at":"2025-05-19T20:36:41.460Z","updated_at":"2025-12-09T12:08:56.154Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T08:44:04.519Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-19T20:51:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T21:56:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-08T13:31:35.815Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-08","summary":"The Government has no current plans to mandate that motorists report a collision involving a cat, or to grant Police powers to prosecute motorists who fail to report a collision involving a cat.","details":"This Government understands how upsetting it is when a much-loved pet is killed on our roads and thank you for raising this issue.\r\n\r\nThis is a compassionate country and although there is no obligation to report all animal deaths on roads, drivers should, if possible, make enquiries to ascertain the owner of domestic animals, such as cats, and advise them of the situation.\r\n\r\nUnder section 170 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, a driver is required to stop and report an accident involving specified animals including horses, cattle, ass, mules, sheep, pigs, goats or dogs, but not cats or wild animals. This requirement arises from their status as working animals rather than as domestic pets. To introduce such a measure within the provision of section 170, would require primary legislation. (Note that certain legislation still uses the word ‘accident’, although the preferred terms are collision or crash.)\r\n\r\nBecause cats are much smaller than other specified animals, and often most active at dawn or dusk, in many cases drivers may not be aware they’ve hit them – particularly with larger vehicles. Because of that, it would be difficult to prosecute drivers if the law was changed.\r\n\r\nIn June 2024, the Government introduced compulsory cat microchipping to help reunite lost and stray cats. All cats in England over 20 weeks of age must be microchipped and registered on a compliant database, unless exempt or free-living. The legislation is intended to improve pet welfare by increasing the likelihood of reuniting lost or stray pet cats with their keepers. Defra works closely with stakeholders to communicate pet microchipping requirements to the public.\r\n\r\nDefra has also commissioned a research project to understand the operational challenges that currently prevent some cats from being reunited with their keepers after a road traffic collision. The project will provide an evidence base to inform best practice for local authorities. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Transport\r\n","created_at":"2025-12-08T13:31:35.813Z","updated_at":"2025-12-09T12:08:56.144Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":744397,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/744397.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Restore the Electoral Commission's Independence","background":"We want ministers stripped of any powers related to the Electoral Commission’s budget and strategy. Parliament must restore the independence the Commission had pre-2022, and guarantee it can operate free from any political influence.","additional_details":"The Electoral Commission exists to safeguard trust in elections. In 2022, the previous government introduced measures to allow ministers to direct the Commission. The current Government have not changed this. We view this as a betrayal, and feel it shows both main parties protecting their own interests. We think a greater degree of independence should be restored if the public are to have confidence that elections remain free and fair. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":16153,"created_at":"2025-09-29T22:24:53.346Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:25:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-05T09:47:46.990Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-29T22:29:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-15T15:59:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T10:08:50.056Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"bruce hamill","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-05","summary":"The Government is taking decisive action to strengthen and protect the UK’s democracy and will continue to support the operational independence of the Electoral Commission.","details":"The Electoral Commission is the independent statutory body which oversees electoral administration and regulates political finance. It is accountable to – and funded by – the UK Parliament via the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission.\r\n\r\nThe Strategy and Policy Statement for the Electoral Commission sets out the Government’s priorities for electoral policy and the role and responsibilities of the Commission in enabling the Government to meet those priorities. The Electoral Commission are required to have regard to the Statement. The existing Statement (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/electoral-commission-strategy-and-policy-statement/electoral-commission-strategy-and-policy-statement) was designated by the previous Government on 29 February 2024.\r\n\r\nThis Government is taking decisive action to strengthen and protect the UK’s democracy. Robust and proportionate enforcement of political finance rules is an essential part of this. That is why, as announced on 17 July in the Government’s Strategy for Elections (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/restoring-trust-in-our-democracy-our-strategy-for-modern-and-secure-elections/restoring-trust-in-our-democracy-our-strategy-for-modern-and-secure-elections), we are committed to strengthening the Electoral Commission’s powers and extending its remit to ensure that it can effectively enforce the political finance framework.\r\n\r\nGiven these changes, the Strategy for Elections also set out the intention to designate a new Strategy and Policy Statement for the Electoral Commission that reflects this Government’s priorities for elections and the Commission’s increased roles and responsibilities.\r\n\r\nIn doing so, we are clear that the Electoral Commission will remain operationally independent, and we will continue to support it to act without fear or favour in upholding political finance rules and stamping out foreign interference. Electoral Commissioners and the Commission’s executive leadership remain responsible for determining how the Commission should discharge its duties, including its strategic priorities and day-to-day operations.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2025-12-05T10:08:50.054Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T10:09:24.136Z"},"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":727372,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727372.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect Legal Migrants: do not implement the 10-Year ILR proposal","background":"We urge the UK Government to scrap plans to extend ILR from 5 to 10 years. We feel that legal migrants, especially care workers, followed the rules and built lives here under the 5-year promise. We think they support vital services and deserve fairness, not shifting rules.","additional_details":"We think that retroactively extending ILR from 5 to 10 years is unfair. We are concerned that it creates insecurity for legal migrants, disrupts vital sectors like health and care, and adds financial strain. We urge the UK Government to withdraw this proposal, protect visa renewals, and prioritise tackling illegal migration. Do not penalise those who follow the law, support the economy, and uphold British values. We think legal migration must be protected, not discouraged.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":106570,"created_at":"2025-05-12T18:11:04.037Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T10:27:55.471Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-23T15:26:53.533Z","closed_at":"2025-11-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T21:44:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-03T09:34:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.530Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-13T10:18:50.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:48:30.921Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"The earned settlement consultation is seeking views on whether the increase in settlement qualifying period will apply to people already in the UK. No decision has been taken on this point.","details":"The Government is grateful for the vital contribution legal migrants make to the UK, including the dedication of overseas health and care workers who deliver high quality care and strengthen our public services.\r\n\r\nThis issue has already been the subject of previous petitions and parliamentary debate earlier this year, including the e-petition ‘Keep the 5-Year ILR pathway for existing Skilled Worker visa holders’ (Petition 727360) and ‘Keep 5-year ILR terms to Hong Kong British National (Overseas) visas’ (Petition 727356), which was debated in Westminster Hall on 8 September 2025. The Home Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into ‘Routes to Settlement’ on 21 October 2025.\r\n\r\nAs set out by the Home Secretary in ‘A Fairer Pathway to Settlement’, the Government is proposing a new, contribution-based settlement model. Under these proposals, the standard qualifying period for settlement will be 10 years. However, individuals will have the opportunity to reduce this period if they demonstrate strong contributions to the UK’s economy and society for example, through sustained employment, National Insurance contributions, English language ability, a clean criminal record, and positive community engagement. Those who have been non-compliant may be required to wait longer or be refused settlement.\r\n\r\nThese are proposals only. No final decisions have been made, and we launched a consultation on the earned settlement proposals on 20 November 2025. The consultation will run for 12 weeks (until 12 February 2026) and is open to all interested parties, including migrants, employers, representative bodies, and members of the public. Its purpose is to gather a wide range of views and evidence on the proposed changes, including the impact on those already in the UK and the practicalities of implementation. The consultation is, in particular, seeking views on whether there should be transitional arrangements for those already on a pathway to settlement.\r\n\r\nThe Government is committed to a transparent and inclusive process. The consultation is being publicised widely, and responses can be submitted online or in writing. All feedback will be carefully considered before any final decisions are made. A summary of responses and the Government’s conclusions will be published after the consultation closes, ensuring that the process is open and accountable. Following the consultation, we will provide full details of how the new model would work, including any transitional arrangements for people already in the UK. We encourage all affected groups including health and care workers to take part in the consultation so that their views and evidence inform the final approach.\r\n\r\nSettlement in the UK is a significant step, bringing lifelong benefits and supporting integration into local communities and the wider country. The Government’s aim is to ensure that settlement is earned through contribution and integration, while maintaining strong safeguards for the most vulnerable. The new model will continue to offer a shorter pathway to settlement for non-UK dependants of British citizens and retain existing protections for victims of domestic violence and abuse.\r\nWe recognise the concerns raised about fairness and the impact on those who have built their lives in the UK under the current system. We will consider these issues carefully, and no changes will be made without listening to the views of those affected.\r\n\r\nFurther information on the proposals announced by the Home Secretary is available in Ministerial statements, November 2025 Command Paper, as well as the May 2025 Immigration White Paper.\r\n\r\nWe are grateful to the petitioners for setting out their views, and we look forward to hearing from them again when they have had the opportunity to study the final proposals in detail.\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746363,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746363.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep 5-Year ILR and Restrict Access to Benefits for New ILR Holders","background":"The Government should keep the current 5-year route to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and restrict access to government benefits for new ILR holders.","additional_details":"Extending the ILR route to 10 years would unfairly affect thousands of Skilled Worker visa holders who moved to the UK based on existing 5-year rules, disrupting their plans, families, and financial stability. The Government should keep the 5-year ILR route and ensuring new ILR holders demonstrate financial independence before accessing public benefits. We think this protect fairness and stability. ","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":241438,"created_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:06.069Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:54:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-18T12:20:30.212Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T15:40:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-22T12:36:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.923Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T15:53:50.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:49:54.168Z","creator_name":"Pulasthi Weerasinghe","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"As set out in the Immigration White Paper, the default qualifying period doubles to 10 years. We welcome views on other measures, including access to benefits, via the earned settlement consultation.","details":"Settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. It is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. It marks an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\r\n\r\nUnder the current system, individuals qualify for settlement primarily on the basis of the length of time they have spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\r\n\r\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in the UK. Moreover, they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\r\n\r\nWe therefore intend to fundamentally reform our settlement rules for the first time in over 50 years. The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, set out that the default qualifying period for settlement would be increased from five to ten years. It also included proposals for a new ‘earned settlement’ model which are subject to consultation.\r\n\r\nThe consultation on the ‘earned settlement’ model launched on 20 November 2025 and will run for 12 weeks until 12 February 2026. It is open to anyone who wishes to share their views, including individuals, organisations and other stakeholders who may be affected by, or have an interest in, the proposed changes.\r\n\r\nWe are proposing to increase the baseline qualifying period for settlement to 15 years for those on the Skilled Worker route in a role below RQF level 6 (equivalent to a bachelor’s degree). \r\n\r\nIn the next five years, settlement volumes are forecast to increase significantly, due to the unprecedented level of migration to the UK in recent years. Between 2021 and 2024, there was significant growth in lower-skilled migration on work routes, particularly on the Health and Social Care visa, which is estimated to make up 47% of settlement grants in 2028.\r\n\r\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\r\n\r\nSpeaking English at degree level, earning a high salary and being employed in specific public service roles would result in a reduction. However, where a person has claimed public funds or committed immigration offences, they would face a penalty of extra years. \r\n\r\nWe are also proposing that benefits and social housing might not be available to new migrants granted settled status and that instead they should be reserved for those who have achieved British citizenship, easing the pressure on public finances.\r\n\r\nFor those who are on a pathway to settlement but have not yet been granted settled status, we are consulting on transitional arrangements for these individuals. \r\n\r\nWe would encourage anyone with an interest in the proposals, including the petitioners who have taken the time to sign this petition, to contribute to the consultation. We realise the significance of these proposals to people and we will listen carefully to what they tell us.\r\n\r\nFurther details on the proposals and the link to respond to the consultation can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/earned-settlement\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729478,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729478.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Transparency and Review of the free zones and ports impacts","background":"To ensure full transparency by releasing data on governance, funding, and operations of free zones. Plus a public review to assess impacts, such as job displacement and value for taxpayers money","additional_details":"We are concerned about the question of value for taxpayers money AND high projected costs. WE call for a review to consider the impact of deregulation, the potential for land grabbing, split of profits between public and private sector, 10 year corporate tax breaks, potential for green washing by fossil fuel companies, plus digital AI Growth Zones\r\n \r\nWe urge the Govt to release data on all free zones operations.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10486,"created_at":"2025-06-05T10:11:21.581Z","updated_at":"2025-12-31T00:00:01.587Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-30T12:48:50.949Z","closed_at":"2025-12-30T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-05T10:46:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-07T10:39:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-28T17:59:32.653Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-28","summary":"All Industrial Strategy Zones (ISZs) are subject to the same laws and regulations as the rest of the UK. The Government maintains the highest levels of transparency and accountability across all ISZs.","details":"This Government is wholly committed to transparency and public accountability in all aspects of economic policy - including our programme of Industrial Strategy Zones (ISZs), the collective term now used for Freeports and Investment Zones. All ISZs operate within the same regulatory frameworks that apply across the UK and are subject to the same laws and standards as elsewhere in the country.\r\n\r\nWe have cemented this position through the ISZs Action Plan (2025), which set out further measures to strengthen transparency and democratic accountability across the ISZ programme. At present, arrangements for transparency, accountability and governance at all Investment Zones and a number of English Freeports are overseen by the relevant Mayoral Strategic Authority (MSA). As we roll out devolution across England, all remaining English Freeports will adopt similar arrangements.\r\n\r\nYour petition makes two asks, which we will respond to in turn.\r\n\r\n1. Release data on governance, funding and operations of free zones\r\n\r\nThe Government has published two Freeport Programme Reports, which detail retrospective information on how Freeports were set up, the seed capital funding they receive and progress so far in terms of the sites developed, investment attracted and money invested. These are available on GOV.UK (UK Freeports Programme Report 2025 - GOV.UK; UK Freeports Programme Annual Report 2022 - GOV.UK).\r\n\r\nSome key findings from the 2025 Report:\r\n\r\n• £157.93m has been disbursed across 39 projects to-date and £6.4bn in private investment has been attracted. \r\n\r\n• 89% of the investment attracted to date has been foreign direct investment, and is therefore less likely to have been displaced from within the UK.\r\n\r\nOn governance, Investment Zones are each currently governed by their respective MSA, so it is ultimately that body which is accountable. With respect to Freeports, each of these have a named local or combined authority which acts as accountable body, ensuring the transparent functioning of the Freeport and the proper management of public funding. Our ISZ Action Plan, goes further to strengthen the accountability of these arrangements, requiring:\r\n\r\n• MSAs are integrated into the governance structures of Freeports, ensuring elected local leaders have oversight and that MSAs become the accountable body for all ISZs in England. This is already the case at Teesside and Liverpool City Region Freeports \r\n\r\n• Freeport Boards publish minutes of all meetings \r\n\r\n• Freeport Boards hold at least one public meeting annually \r\n\r\n• Trade Union representation on all Freeport Boards in England and Wales, mirroring effective worker voice already in place in Scottish Green Freeports\r\n\r\nThe Government will continue to support all ISZs to bring these new accountability arrangements into play.  \r\n\r\n2. A public review to assess impacts, such as job displacement and value for taxpayers money\r\n\r\nAt present, we do not believe a further independent review is required. In addition to the two Programme Reports we have published, the Business and Trade Select Committee recently undertook a comprehensive inquiry into the performance and governance of Investment Zones and Freeports in England, to which the Government provided both written and oral evidence. (The performance of investment zones and freeports in England - Committees - UK Parliament). The Government subsequently incorporated many of their recommendations into the ISZ Action Plan.\r\n\r\nThe  Freeport Programme is subject to other layers of public scrutiny, the findings of which will be made publicly available in due course:\r\n\r\n• Inclusion within the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP), ensuring regular review by the National Infrastructure and Service Transformation Authority (NISTA), published annually on GOV.UK (Major projects data - GOV.UK). \r\n\r\n• A planned Value for Money evaluation, to occur in due course after sufficient time has passed for programme impacts to materialise.\r\n\r\nThe Government recognises the importance of ensuring that ISZs deliver genuinely additional economic benefits rather than displacing existing activity. This is why lessons from previous programmes, such as Enterprise Zones, have informed Freeports and Investment Zones' design. For example, Employer NIC relief applying only to new employees, and that the programmes prioritise foreign direct investment and emerging sectors.\r\n\r\nIndependent analysis from Arup projected that the eight English Freeports could create around 60,000 net new jobs and support an additional 42,000 jobs across supply chains, contributing approximately £6.6bn per year in GVA. This analysis is being further refined by Cambridge Econometrics and the Government is considering options for publication.\r\n\r\nThe Government remains committed to publishing evaluation findings and programme data at regular intervals. Transparency and accountability will continue to underpin the ISZ approach as we seek to deliver sustainable growth, attract investment, and secure long-term value for the taxpayer.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2025-11-28T17:59:32.651Z","updated_at":"2025-11-28T18:00:20.450Z"},"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":725049,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/725049.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Provide a legal right to access certain services without a digital device","background":"We call on the Government to make it law that all British citizens have a legal right to access certain services without a digital device. Protect the right to choose a non-digital or digital life—and ensure digital is a choice, not a requirement, for anyone, anywhere, at any age.","additional_details":"As digital norms spread, many real-world options disappear. We think no one should face barriers to healthcare, education, banking, travel, culture or telephone communication because they cannot—or choose not to—use a digital device. This is about freedom of choice and the right to choose whether to live without—or be surrounded by—the internet.\r\n \r\nWithout non-digital alternatives, we may lose our ability to make that choice—and our children grow up thinking they never had one.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10911,"created_at":"2025-04-14T03:35:41.728Z","updated_at":"2026-01-13T15:38:43.249Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-20T13:25:11.162Z","closed_at":"2025-11-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-14T11:07:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-11T08:16:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-26T16:51:28.558Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-17","summary":"We are committed to ensuring public services are accessible and inclusive for all. We are determined to ensure everyone benefits from technological change, and understand some people may need support.","details":"We know that digital inclusion can transform people’s lives for the better. Families can save money on their groceries and energy bills when they shop online; those looking for work can find better job opportunities and earn more; and people can more easily access the services they need – including the NHS and welfare. Research from the Centre for Social Justice (https://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/library/left-out) shows that people who are online are more likely to be in well-paying jobs and can save up to 25% on things like home insurance, train travel and food compared to consumers who are not online.\r\n \r\nThat is why digital inclusion is at the heart of how we deliver better designed, time-saving public services. We must ensure as many people as possible can access public services digitally, but that we also support the digitally excluded. To this end, in February we published the Digital Inclusion Action Plan, which sets out our immediate actions to deliver digital inclusion for everyone across the UK, regardless of their circumstances.  \r\n \r\nOne area of focus is about making government digital services easier to use. UK citizens can access essential public sector services using digital or non-digital means. In the UK, essential public services include healthcare, emergency services, education and social care. \r\n \r\nThere are no plans currently to legislate to provide the right of access, including through non-digital means, to services that extend beyond essential public sector services. We encourage key private sector services important to people’s daily lives – like banking, utilities and online shopping – to prioritise inclusive digital services, and remain committed to working with industry and the voluntary sector to explore opportunities to align. \r\n \r\nWe are committed to ensuring all public services are accessible to users with impairments or disabilities. This is a legal requirement under the Public Sector Bodies (Websites and Mobile Applications) Accessibility Regulations 2018 and the Government Service Standard Sets best practice for accessibility, including ensuring offline routes are well supported – for example telephone support, alternative paper forms and postal routes, or face-to-face assessments where needed. \r\n \r\nBelow we set out some of the ways that people can access public sector services, with or without digital skills or devices, ensuring everyone is supported.\r\n \r\nNHS: \r\nTo ensure patients are not digitally excluded, GPs should provide the option of telephoning or visiting their practice in person, and all online tools must be provided in addition to, rather than as a replacement for, other channels for accessing a GP. The NHS have also committed to work with digital transformation teams in integrated care boards and with groups at risk of digital exclusion to ensure digital solutions are inclusive.  \r\n\r\nPeople unable to access online services, or visit their GP in person, can ask for a feature called proxy access available through the NHS App. This allows a relative or carer to act on the patient’s behalf, so that they can help them manage their health and care.\r\n\r\nLocal councils:\r\nLocal councils have a legal obligation to ensure their services are accessible. This includes offering non-digital options for all vital services, such as applications for Council Tax reductions, Housing Benefit, and Blue Badges. All public sector bodies, including local councils, must comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines aimed at improving web accessibility. \r\n\r\nEmployment:\r\nLocal Jobcentres provide face-to-face appointments for those unable to use digital services and have dedicated support in the form of Disability Employment Advisers for customers with health barriers. \r\n \r\nPersonal Identification:\r\nThe government has committed to a new, free national digital pass to empower people in their lives. It will be inclusive, secure and useful. As part of our consultation in the new year, we will be considering approaches like a digitally-enabled physical alternative for those without access to technology, in-person onboarding support for those who struggle to engage digitally, and a dedicated case working function for those who may struggle to initially prove their identity and access the system. \r\n \r\nThis is in parallel to existing forms of ID that can be applied for online or by post, including driving licences and passports.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology\r\n\r\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/725049 ","created_at":"2025-11-26T16:51:28.555Z","updated_at":"2026-01-13T15:36:30.381Z"},"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":732221,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732221.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Criminalise & legally require schools to tackle bullying in & out of school","background":"We urge the Government to make repeated bullying over the age of 10 a specific criminal offence, and to make it a legal requirement for schools to act on all forms of bullying, inside and out of school, and mandate mental health reviews after bullying-related self-harm.","additional_details":"Too many children are bullied in and out of school. We ask the Government for real consequences, urgent mental health intervention, and legal protection.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":18822,"created_at":"2025-07-02T17:53:37.267Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T11:03:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-17T09:11:50.213Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-02T18:11:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-10T19:26:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-26T12:27:07.299Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Courtney lee","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-26","summary":"Bullying is never acceptable. Schools have duties to prevent and address it, and we continue to promote best practice whilst also improving early mental health support for young people.","details":"The Government is clear that all forms of bullying are unacceptable and recognises that bullying can have a devastating and long-lasting effect on individuals’ mental health. Tackling and preventing bullying in schools is essential to ensure that all schools are supportive environments within which pupils feel they belong and are able to achieve and thrive. The death of Willow Lee is a stark and tragic reminder of the potential consequences of bullying and of the need for schools to make both preventing and tackling bullying a priority, and to work with specialists to ensure that the right mental health support is provided at the right time.\r\n\r\nThe legal framework for this already exists and the Government is taking steps to improve both prevention and support. Schools are already legally required to have a behaviour policy. This should set out the policies and processes in place to prevent and deal with violence, bullying or harassment by pupils and be clear about the standards of behaviour expected in school or outside of school and the consequences or sanctions for such behaviour, which include reporting incidents to the police or taking legal action. \r\n\r\nThe Department for Education (the Department) provides schools with support to tackle bullying with its guidance Preventing and tackling bullying. The guidance is clear that schools should make appropriate provision for a bullied child's social, emotional and mental health needs. The guidance can be found here: Preventing and tackling bullying (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1069688/Preventing_and_tackling_bullying_advice.pdf)\r\n\r\nIn terms of criminal offences, while bullying in itself is not a specific criminal offence in the UK, a number types of harassing or threatening behaviour – or communications – can be a criminal offence, for example under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, the Malicious Communications Act 1988, the Communications Act 2003, and the Public Order Act 1986. This means that there is a route to treat many specific instances as a criminal offence and Government guidance is clear that if school staff feel that an offence might have been committed, they should seek assistance from the police.\r\n\r\nIt is also vitally important that children and young people get early and appropriate support for mental health issues, including those that might be related to bullying. In particular, the Government is committed to supporting children and young people and others who have self-harmed or are at risk of self-harming through the targeted actions in the Suicide Prevention Strategy for England. These actions focus efforts on prevention and the provision of consistent high-quality care and support for self-harm. The Government continues to fund the Multicentre Study of Self-harm, whose work is vital in informing the development of policy, and of clinical practice across sectors.\r\n\r\nMore widely, the Government is providing access to specialist mental health professionals in every school by expanding Mental Health Support Teams (MHSTs), so every child and young person has access to early support to address problems before they escalate. Almost a million more young people will get access to MHSTs this year. One of the core functions of MHSTs is to give timely advice to school staff and liaise with external specialist services to help children and young people to get the right support. They also provide evidence-based interventions for early mental health issues.\r\n\r\nThe Department monitors young people’s perceptions of bullying through the annual National Behaviour Survey report, to develop our understanding of bullying prevalence and trends. The latest version (2023/24) is available here: National Behaviour Survey (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68a5ec7b8e2cb87576994d6f/National_behaviour_survey_AY_2023_2024_August_2025.pdf)\r\n\r\nThe Department is strongly committed to providing continued support for schools to tackle bullying and is procuring an expert- and evidence-led review into best practice on preventing and tackling bullying, as well as promoting good behaviour and reducing preventable exclusions. This will inform the creation of a practical resource for schools, to be tested in a range of schools before being rolled out nationally. This approach has been informed by recent engagement with a range of stakeholders, including teachers, parents, academics, charities and young people, to understand more about the issues around bullying.\r\n\r\nThe learning from the best practice review will inform the support to be shared across new Regional Improvement for Standards and Excellence (RISE) Attendance and Behaviour Hubs, which are being established across regions in England to focus on supporting senior leaders to develop safe, supportive school cultures. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-11-26T12:27:07.297Z","updated_at":"2025-11-26T12:27:41.227Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":731355,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/731355.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require schools to let children use the toilet at all times in the school day","background":"Make it mandatory for schools to allow students to go to the toilet at all times throughout the school day when they need to and do not lock toilets so that they aren’t accessible during certain times of the day.","additional_details":"We believe some children’s mental and physical health is being affected by not allowing them to access a toilet during school lessons and even break times. We think some children are limiting how much they drink during the day so they don’t have to go to toilet and some girls are struggling with menstruation where access to use the toilet may be denied to them during certain times of the day. We think children are being punished for using the toilet when they need to. We're concerned that this can happen in the year 2025.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":19728,"created_at":"2025-06-24T08:18:40.018Z","updated_at":"2026-01-20T15:21:51.059Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-18T12:14:31.927Z","closed_at":"2026-01-18T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-24T10:20:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-07T09:04:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-26T12:13:09.940Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-09","summary":"Schools are responsible for setting policies, including around toilet use. They must do this in line with national behaviour guidance, and in a way which treats all pupils with dignity and respect.","details":"The government does not have any plans to update or amend the guidance. It is for school leaders to develop and implement a policy that works for their own schools and school community, including on toilet use.\r\n\r\nAll schools must be mindful of their duty of care responsibilities to pupils and ensure that individual circumstances are fully considered, and any health issues are fully taken into account when reaching decisions of this nature.\r\n\r\nAll schools must adhere to the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. The employer in a school must take reasonable steps to ensure that staff and pupils are not exposed to risks to their health and safety.\r\n\r\nThe advice on standards for school premises (2015) is clear that suitable toilet and washing facilities must be provided for the sole use of pupils. It is for schools to find reasonable ways, in accordance with the law, to ensure every child’s right to access clean and safe toilet facilities when they need them: \r\n\r\nhttps://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/410294/Advice_on_standards_for_school_premises.pdf\r\n\r\nIn cases where parents or children may have concerns, they should speak to their school in the first instance. Where parents or children are dissatisfied with the school’s response, a formal complaint with the school may be lodged. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Education\r\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/731355)","created_at":"2025-11-26T12:13:09.936Z","updated_at":"2026-01-20T15:21:15.734Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738484,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738484.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Commission independent inquiry into delays in SEND education provision","background":"Many children with SEND are being failed. Some families can wait months or even years for support, leaving children without the education they are legally entitled to and causing long-term harm. ","additional_details":"Thousands of SEND children are affected by this. We call for accountability and an urgent, independent investigation into systemic failings in SEND provision, to hold authorities to account and deliver real change for children and families.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":36049,"created_at":"2025-08-20T02:10:59.416Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T09:09:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-25T08:09:40.512Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-20T06:37:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-29T11:17:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-25T08:27:22.408Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Rachel E Noel","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-22","summary":"The government will work to ensure children with SEND get a high-quality education. The SEND National Conversation, Select Committee reports and Schools White Paper consultation will inform reforms.","details":"Every child in our country deserves the best possible school experience – one that is academically stretching, where every child feels like they belong, and that sets them up for life and work. \r\n\r\nBoth the Public Accounts Committee and the Education Select Committee have undertaken their own independent inquiries into SEND provision across England and published their findings earlier this year:\r\n\r\nSupport for children and young people with special educational needs - Committees - UK Parliament\r\n(https://committees.parliament.uk/work/8582/support-for-children-and-young-people-with-special-educational-needs/)\r\n\r\nSolving the SEND Crisis - Committees - UK Parliament\r\n(https://committees.parliament.uk/work/8684/solving-the-send-crisis/)\r\n\r\nBoth inquiries highlight that children with SEND and their families are being let down by a system that is failing to meet their needs, hampering their outcomes at school and chance to get on in life. The government is therefore not planning to commission a further independent inquiry into delays in SEND education provision. \r\n\r\nAs part of our Plan for Change, we are determined to fix the SEND system and restore the trust of parents. We will do this by ensuring schools have the tools to better identify and support children before issues escalate to crisis point. \r\n\r\nWe will strengthen accountability on mainstream settings to be inclusive including through the newly introduced Ofsted inspection framework; support the mainstream workforce to increase their SEND expertise and encourage schools to set up Resourced Provision or SEN units to increase capacity in mainstream schools. This will enable children to receive specialist support whilst learning alongside their friends and wider community.\r\n\r\nThis government is determined to deliver reform that stands the test of time and rebuilds the confidence of families. That is why we launched a further period of listening and engagement – seeking the views of parents, young people, teachers and experts in every region of the country, so that lived experience and partnership are at the heart of our solutions. \r\n\r\nWe know that families are crying out for change, and that is exactly why it is critical we get this right. Proposals will draw on the National Conversation, which was not a formal consultation but an expansion of ongoing engagement, to ensure parents’ voices are heard. Information and learning will also be taken from both the Public Accounts Committee and the Education Select Committee reports, following two separate inquiries into SEND provision. We will set out our full proposals in the upcoming Schools White Paper, building on the work we’ve already done to create a system that’s rooted in inclusion, where children receive high-quality support early on and can thrive at their local school. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Education\r\n\r\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/738484)\r\n","created_at":"2025-11-25T08:27:22.405Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T14:38:44.599Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":732993,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732993.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review decision to abolish independent local Healthwatch","background":"We are asking the government to:\r\n• Revisit its decision to abolish local independent services that speak up for the public\r\n• Consult with the public to codesign a service which meets their needs and supports the NHS to realise its ambitions\r\n• Invest in and strengthen independent services","additional_details":"Local independent services are rooted in their communities. We think they are well placed to support the 10-Year Health Plan by offering constructive challenge and helping co-produce solutions with those with the greatest health and care needs. We think trusted independent services that listen to local communities are essential to improving health and social care.\r\nWe listen without fear or favour and reach those whose voices are often ignored.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11042,"created_at":"2025-07-11T10:12:13.588Z","updated_at":"2026-02-08T00:00:20.112Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-07T13:37:27.186Z","closed_at":"2026-02-07T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-11T10:21:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-30T21:01:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-21T16:48:37.198Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-21","summary":"The number of organisations monitoring patient experience is causing confusion and risks inaction. We will close some organisations like Healthwatch to allow direct patient feedback to care providers.","details":"The Government asked Dr Penny Dash to carry out a review of patient safety across the health and care landscape. Dr Dash’s review focused on six key organisations overseen by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC): the Care Quality Commission, the National Guardian’s Office, Healthwatch England (and the local Healthwatch network), the Patient Safety Commissioner, the Health Services Safety Investigations Body and the patient-safety learning related functions of NHS Resolution.\r\n\r\nDr Dash found that there are many organisations carrying out reviews and investigations or looking at user experience. This can lead to an overwhelming number of recommendations which can cause confusion for patients and users. At the same time, customer experience is not given the attention that it deserves in the NHS. Dr Dash aimed to streamline, simplify and consolidate functions across the patient safety landscape to remove duplication and overlap, and make processes simpler and more effective for users and patients.\r\n\r\nThe report of the Dash review of patient safety across the health and care landscape was published in July 2025. In the report, Dr Dash made nine recommendations which the Government has accepted in full and aligns with the 10 Year Health Plan for England. As such no other options have been considered. We consider the Dash review to be thorough, with all the recommendations aiding to meet the overall objective.\r\n\r\nThe Government will abolish Healthwatch England (HWE) and Local Healthwatch (LHW) in their current form. A new patient experience directorate within DHSC, will bring patient voice ‘in house’. This will become a central function of the Department and ensure Integrated Care Boards (ICBs) and Local Authorities (LAs) incorporate the views of patients and users directly into strategic planning of services for health and social care.\r\n\r\nICBs will be responsible for the health function of LHW. They will ensure the functions are incorporated in provider organisations alongside existing patient engagement work such as Patient Participation Groups. LAs will be responsible for the social care LHW functions.\r\n\r\nThe overall objective is to simplify the patient safety landscape with the combined intended outcome to improve quality of care, including safety, by making it clear where responsibility and accountability sit at all levels of the system, and making it easier for staff, patients and users to directly feed into and access the system. And for the system to hear more clearly and so act on the views.\r\n\r\nThe Government aims for there to be fewer organisations in the patient safety landscape. Patients and users will have a clearer path to providing feedback, which will directly input into the centre, and the commissioners and providers of health and care. Their voices will influence policy, strategic thinking and planning with the aim of improving the quality and safety of care, both in their local areas and nationally.\r\n\r\nTo achieve the aims and outcomes, the Government must first make legislative changes to abolish HWE and LHW in their current form. Existing legislation will be amended or revoked with the functions currently held by HWE and LHW moving to the Secretary of State, ICBs and LAs.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-11-21T16:48:37.191Z","updated_at":"2025-11-21T16:48:37.191Z"},"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":742179,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/742179.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Lower the age for invites to regular mammograms to 40 & perform annually","background":"Lower the age for when you are first called to 40 and provide funding to carry out Mammograms Annually instead of every Three Years","additional_details":"Early detection is key and the prevalence of Breast Cancer in young patients is rising\r\nI am a Chemotherapy Nurse and working in this Clinical Setting for 8 Years and I have seen a rise in Breast Cancer in Patients under the Age of 40 increase.\r\nEarly detection is key in identifying those Aggressive forms of Breast Cancer\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":102978,"created_at":"2025-09-20T08:21:09.508Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:20:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-09T09:53:10.035Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-20T08:41:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-05T09:30:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-21T11:29:44.277Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-24T21:09:30.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Gemma Reeves","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-21","summary":"In line with independent advice from the UK National Screening Committee, the Government does not intend to lower the age or increase the frequency of breast screens.","details":"The Government is guided by the independent scientific advice of the UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC), and it is only where the offer to screen provides more good than harm that a screening programme is recommended. The UK NSC makes its recommendations based on internationally recognised criteria and a rigorous evidence review and consultation process.\r\n\r\nAs screening programmes can also cause harms, each of the adult screening programmes has both an upper and lower age range, within which there is good scientific evidence that the benefits of screening outweigh the harms.\r\n\r\nWomen younger than the age of 50 are not routinely screened for breast cancer due to the lower risk of women under this age developing breast cancer, and the fact that women below 50 tend to have denser breasts. The denseness of breast tissue reduces the ability of getting an accurate mammogram, the accepted screening test for breast cancer.\r\n\r\nDue to this and other factors, there is a risk of over treatment and distress for women who do not have breast cancer but would be subjected to invasive and painful medical treatments and diagnostic tests.\r\n\r\nThe 2012 UK independent review of breast cancer screening (the Marmot review) estimated that inviting women aged 50-70 reduces mortality from breast cancer in the population invited by 20% and saves an estimated 1,300 lives a year. The Marmot review found that screening women outside the ages of 50-70 could lead to over-diagnosis (referring women for unnecessary tests) and over-treatment (operating on women with disease which is unlikely to cause serious harm to them).\r\n\r\nWe are in line with most European countries, most of whom screen women between the ages of 50-69.\r\n\r\nWomen with a very high risk of breast cancer (for example, due to family history) may be offered screening earlier and more frequently, sometimes using MRI rather than a mammogram.\r\n\r\nThe UK NSC keeps these age brackets under review. The Committee recognises that screening programmes are not static and that, over time, they may need to change to be more effective.\r\n\r\nThe UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) reviewed the evidence relating to the provision of additional breast screening for women who have dense breast tissue in the summer of 2025 and invited stakeholders’ feedback on the findings to inform future work. In addition, the AgeX – age extension – breast screening research trial has been looking at the effectiveness of offering some women an extra screen between the ages of 47 and 49, and between the ages of 71 and 73. When the results are available, the report will be reviewed by the UK NSC.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-11-21T11:29:44.275Z","updated_at":"2025-11-21T11:29:44.275Z"},"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":727063,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727063.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Fund better Functional Neurological Disorder care, treatment and support","background":"We urge the Government to increase funding to ensure better Functional Neurological Disorder (FND) care, including clear FND care pathways in health trusts, multidisciplinary teams trained in FND, more follow-up appointments for patients, and mandatory training for GPs, neurologists, and A&E staff.","additional_details":"We are not just statistics. We are people living with a life-altering condition. We ask for dignity, proper care, and a system that recognises and supports us. We live with real, disabling symptoms from seizures and paralysis to chronic fatigue and cognitive challenges. We feel we deserve the same standards of care as patients with other neurological or chronic conditions.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":17266,"created_at":"2025-05-08T21:51:11.245Z","updated_at":"2025-12-14T00:00:03.739Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-13T09:02:34.868Z","closed_at":"2025-12-13T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-08T22:25:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-30T01:53:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-19T14:31:29.405Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-19","summary":"Improving health outcomes for people living with long-term conditions, including functional neurological disorder (FND), is a key part of the Government's ambition to build an NHS fit for the future.","details":"The Government recognises that FND is a complex condition, involving a range of neurological symptoms without a clear cause, which can impact on an individual’s life significantly. FND can be difficult to diagnose, as well as to treat, as its wide variety of symptoms can make it hard to find effective interventions.\r\n\r\nThe Government recognises that there is a need to do more to improve access to services for people living with conditions such as FND. This is why improving care for people with long-term conditions is a key priority for this Government and the NHS, and we are committed to ensuring they receive high-quality care and support and access to the latest treatments. The recently published 10 Year Health Plan for England will ensure a better health service for everyone, regardless of condition or service area.\r\n\r\nAt a national level, there are a number of initiatives supporting service improvement and better care for patients with neurological conditions, including FND, such as the Getting It Right First Time Programme for Neurology and the Neurology Transformation Programme, which aim to improve care for people by reducing variation and delivering care more equitably across England.\r\n\r\nIn addition to this, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has developed guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders. The guidance, which was published on 15 October 2025, emphasises a holistic approach and focuses on individual needs and promoting independence and well-being. Specifically, it recommends a multidisciplinary team approach, a single point of contact for coordination of care, and access to various therapies like physical therapy, occupational therapy and psychological support. More information on the guidance can be found at this link: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/NG252\r\n\r\nNHS England has recently published a new service specification covering the provision of specialised neurology services for adults, which routinely diagnose and treat individuals aged 16 and older with suspected or confirmed neurological conditions. The new specification includes FND as a major area of adult specialised neurology activity that must be provided at each specialised neurology centre, including assessment, formulation, and treatment planning for patients who have not sufficiently benefited from first line management within core neurology services. A copy of the specification is available at the following link: https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/specialised-neurology-services-adults/\r\n\r\nThe service specification emphasises a multidisciplinary approach by outlining a networked model of care where secondary and tertiary neurology services, alongside core services and community teams, work collaboratively to provide seamless, needs-based support for people with neurological conditions like FND. This includes collaboration with local authority services, community-based professionals, and other hospital services to deliver rehabilitation, reablement and disability management across all condition groups.\r\n\r\nService specifications are important in clearly defining the standards of care expected from organisations funded by NHS England to provide specialised care. Integrated care boards must follow the national standards for specialised services set by NHS England, and there are a number of mechanisms in place to assure compliance with these service specifications.\r\n\r\nWe have also set up a UK-wide Neuro Forum, facilitating formal, biannual meetings across the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England, devolved governments and health services, and Neurological Alliances of all four UK nations. The new forum, which has met twice to date, brings key stakeholders together to share learnings across the system, discuss important neurology services transformation and workforce challenges, as well as best practice examples and potential solutions that will add both to the existing programmes of work and wider health plans.\r\n\r\nThe standard of training for GPs and other health care professionals is the responsibility of the independent statutory regulatory bodies, which set the outcome standards expected at undergraduate level and approve courses, and higher education institutions, which write and teach the curricula content that enables their students to meet the regulators’ outcome standards. Once qualified, healthcare professionals 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 should include taking account of any new research and guidance, to ensure that they can continue to provide high-quality care. To increase understanding of FND among GPs, the Royal College of General Practitioners has produced a learning course, which includes a module on recognising and explaining FND, which can be found at: https://www.rcgp.org.uk/learning-resources/courses-and-events/elearning-courses\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-11-19T14:31:29.402Z","updated_at":"2025-11-19T14:31:29.402Z"},"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":732559,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732559.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council approved events only","background":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public to minimise the harm caused to vulnerable people and animals. Defenceless animals can die from the distress caused by fireworks.\r\n\r\nI believe that permitting unregulated use of fireworks is an act of wide-scale cruelty to animals.","additional_details":" \r\n \r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":195930,"created_at":"2025-07-06T14:27:42.186Z","updated_at":"2026-02-21T07:18:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-20T10:08:00.535Z","closed_at":"2026-02-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-06T20:30:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T18:36:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.287Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-09T20:23:40.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:23:55.089Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-18","summary":"The Government recognises the negative impact fireworks can have on some people and animals.  However, when used responsibly they are a source of enjoyment for many people. ","details":"The Government’s intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, while reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused.\r\n\r\nAt this point in time the Government does not have any plans to ban the sale of fireworks to consumers. We have launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside encouraging people to consider going to a public display. Public displays are more likely to be well-publicised, providing people with an opportunity to prepare ahead of the display taking place. The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks. This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately. My safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\r\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\r\n\r\nA regulatory framework currently controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks to consumers. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine.  There is also a maximum noise level of 120 decibels with many retailers also offering ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks.\r\n\r\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.  \r\n\r\nTo inform any future action the Government will continue to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.  \r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.285Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T12:57:00.440Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":726174,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/726174.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop the Planning and Infrastructure Bill 2025 to Protect Nature","background":"We think the Planning and Infrastructure Bill 2025 threatens irreplaceable habitats, weakens environmental protections, and ignores pressures on public services. We urge the Government to withdraw it to protect nature and our communities.","additional_details":"We think the Planning and Infrastructure Bill 2025 would let developers destroy vital habitats by paying a levy, weakening protections for nature. Ancient ecosystems cannot be replaced. We think the Government should prioritise restoring empty homes, protecting green spaces, and investing in communities, not pushing through what we think is deregulated development that could harm people and the environment.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":14151,"created_at":"2025-04-27T17:37:00.666Z","updated_at":"2025-11-17T17:06:42.227Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-13T14:00:03.919Z","closed_at":"2025-11-13T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-04-27T18:20:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-21T17:23:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-17T17:06:11.736Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-17","summary":"The government has no intention of withdrawing its landmark Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which is integral to unlocking sustained economic growth and will support nature recovery and restoration.","details":"The Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which will speed up and streamline the delivery of new homes and critical infrastructure, is integral to delivering the improved prosperity our country needs and the higher living standards working people deserve. It will play a vital part in delivering the government’s Plan for Change milestones of building 1.5 million safe and decent homes in England, and fast-tracking 150 planning decisions on major economic infrastructure projects, by the end of this Parliament. The government has no intention of withdrawing the Bill. \r\n\r\nWe remain firmly of the view that when it comes to development and the environment, we can do better than the status quo, which too often sees both sustainable housebuilding and nature recovery stall. Instead of environmental protections being seen as barriers to growth, we are determined to unlock a win-win for the economy and for nature.\r\n\r\nThe current approach to discharging environmental obligations is too often delaying and deterring development and placing unnecessary burdens on housebuilders and local authorities. It requires housebuilders to pay for localised and often costly mitigation measures, only to maintain the environmental status quo. By not taking a holistic view across larger geographies, mitigation measures often fail to secure the best outcomes for the environment.\r\n\r\nThe Nature Restoration Fund (NRF) established by the Bill will end this sub-optimal arrangement. By facilitating a more strategic approach to the discharge of environmental obligations, leveraging economies of scale and reducing the need for costly project-level assessments, it will allow us to secure better outcomes for nature, deliver planning consents more quickly, and ensure that the aggregate cost to developers is no greater than the status quo. \r\n\r\nThe NRF will provide funding for Natural England (or another designated delivery body) to bring forward Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs). The EDP will set out the relevant environmental obligations that will be discharged, disapplied or modified as a result of making the payment, and the conservation measures that will be taken to address the impact of specified types of development on relevant environmental features—a specific protected feature of a protected site, or a specific protected species.\r\n\r\nWhen making a decision on whether to make an EDP, the Secretary of State must be satisfied that the conservation measures set out in the EDP materially outweigh the negative effects of the proposed development. In determining whether the proposed conservation measures will address negative impacts and contribute to an overall improvement in the environmental feature, the Secretary of State will benefit from the views of consultees and, where applicable, the expertise of Natural England in preparing the EDP.\r\n\r\nThe Bill sets out that the specific environmental obligations which may be discharged by EDPs are only those stemming from certain provisions within the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017, the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, or the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.  \r\n\r\nThe provisions in the Bill will not reduce existing protections for irreplaceable habitats set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Those protections provide that where development results in the loss or deterioration of irreplaceable habitats, development should be refused, unless there are wholly exceptional reasons and a suitable compensation strategy exists. EDPs can be used only to discharge specific environmental obligations, while developers are still required to comply with wider environmental obligations. Crucially, under the Bill network measures could never be used where to do so would result in the loss of an irreplaceable habitat as this would inherently not pass the overall improvement test. \r\n\r\nThe NPPF is also clear that strategic policies should make sufficient provision for green infrastructure. Green infrastructure is a network of multi-functional green and blue spaces and other natural features, urban and rural, which is capable of delivering a wide range of environmental, economic, health and wellbeing benefits for nature, climate, local and wider communities and prosperity. \r\n\r\nThe government also wants to see more empty homes brought back into use across the country. Local authorities have strong powers and incentives to tackle empty homes. They have the discretionary powers to charge additional council tax on properties which have been left unoccupied and substantially unfurnished for one or more years. The government outlined its intent to strengthen local authorities’ ability to take over the management of vacant residential premises in the English Devolution White Paper published in December 2024. Further details will be set out in due course.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government","created_at":"2025-11-17T17:06:11.733Z","updated_at":"2025-11-17T17:06:11.733Z"},"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":737513,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/737513.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Raise the income tax personal allowance from £12,570 to £20,000","background":"This would help with increasing rent, mortgages, Council tax, and Gas and Electric bills. Some families can’t afford to go back to work after children due to childcare costs wiping their whole income!","additional_details":"We think that we are currently paying ridiculous amounts of tax, and that minimum wage isn't even enough to support an average family.\r\nWe believe that this would lead to a massive increase on people willing to look for work, instead of people not wanting to, due to it being too expensive to now live.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":94048,"created_at":"2025-08-13T23:01:41.585Z","updated_at":"2026-03-01T23:00:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-29T12:59:42.690Z","closed_at":"2026-02-28T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-14T04:31:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-31T06:57:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-17T14:20:53.847Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-17","summary":"The Government is committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible while ensuring fiscal responsibility, so we will not increase the Personal Allowance to £20,000. ","details":"The Government is committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible while investing in public services and not taking risks with the economy.\r\n\r\nThe Government currently has no plans to increase the Personal Allowance to £20,000. Increasing the Personal Allowance to £20,000 would come at a significant fiscal cost of more than £50 billion per annum. This would reduce tax receipts substantially, decreasing funds available for the UK’s hospitals, schools, and other essential public services that we all rely on. A £50 billion cut in public services is equivalent to slashing roughly a quarter of the NHS Budget, or around 80% of defence spending. \r\n\r\nTo support the lowest paid workers in our economy, the Government asked the Low Pay Commission to account for the cost of living when making their recommendations on the minimum wage rates to apply from April 2025, for the first time. The government is also supporting families through the universal offer of 15 hours of government-funded childcare for all parents of 3- and 4-year-olds and eligible working parents of children aged 9 months and above can access 30 hours a week in free childcare.\r\n\r\nThe Government keeps all taxes under review as part of the policy making process. The Chancellor will announce any changes to the tax system at the Budget on the 26th November in the usual way.\r\n\r\nHM Treasury\r\n","created_at":"2025-11-17T14:20:53.845Z","updated_at":"2025-11-17T14:20:53.845Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":736578,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/736578.json"},"attributes":{"action":"End testing on dogs and other animals for development of products for human use","background":"Many tests on dogs and other animals cause unimaginable suffering. They can translate poorly into effective treatments and cures for human diseases or provide safety and efficacy data that is not relevant to humans.","additional_details":"Over 90% of drugs that appear safe and effective in animals do not go on to receive FDA, USA approval.\r\n \r\nIn 2023, 2,605,528 animals were used for the first time in scientific procedures incl. 2,477 dogs & 1,815 primates. Animals are bred & housed in bleak conditions and then used in tests that can cause immense physical and psychological suffering. We think government-led action is required to radically divert funding and evolve policy to implement the use of existing and the development of new Non-Animal Methodologies (NAMS). We believe the current testing paradigm is failing both animals and humans and is holding back medical advances.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":110399,"created_at":"2025-08-07T21:10:12.188Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T12:40:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-31T10:22:59.264Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-07T21:53:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-02T14:09:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.743Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-19T19:54:00.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Maria Iriart","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-13","summary":"The use of animals for development of products for human use remains necessary. The Government therefore does not agree to end testing on dogs and other animals for testing and research purposes.","details":"Our published Replacing Animals in Science strategy (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy) will accelerate the roll out of safe and effective alternatives to phase out animal testing in all but exceptional circumstances, delivering on our manifesto pledge to “partner with scientists, industry, and civil society as we work towards the phasing out of animal testing\". By streamlining the process for bringing alternatives forward, the Government will accelerate our transition away from animal use, while continuing to support crucial research and innovation.\r\n\r\nScientific advances make the prospects for change better than they have ever been, and we are supporting the acceleration of advances in biomedical science and technologies, to reduce reliance on the use of animals in research. This includes stem cell research, cell culture systems that mimic the function of human organs, imaging and new computer modelling and AI techniques based on very large data sets.\r\n\r\nThe strategy is backed by £75m of funding to accelerate safe and effective alternative methods, including £30m for the UK Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (UKCVAM) – a new centre to make the path to regulatory approval for new alternatives as straightforward as possible. It also includes £30m for a preclinical translational models hub – an institute that will bring together data, technology and expertise to promote collaboration between researchers.\r\n\r\nThe strategy includes a target that aims to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of dogs and non-human primates in dedicated pharmacokinetic (PK) studies for human medicines by at least 35% by 2030. The strategy also sets a target to aim to use validated alternative methods to reduce the use of non-human primates and dogs in dedicated cardiovascular safety studies by at least 50% by 2030.\r\n\r\nThe strategy builds on our current approach, to actively support and fund the development and dissemination of techniques that replace, reduce and refine the use of animals in research (the 3Rs), and to ensure that the UK continues to have a robust regulatory system for licensing animal studies and enforcing legal standards. The UK has a world leading reputation for the delivery of the 3Rs. UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) provides core funding for the National Centre for 3Rs (NC3Rs), which works nationally and internationally to drive the uptake of 3Rs technologies and ensure that advances in the 3Rs are reflected in policy, practice and regulations on animal research.\r\n\r\nThe Government will continue to support the appropriate use of animals where reliable and effective alternatives are not yet available. Animal testing is required by all global medicines regulators, including the UK’s Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). However, we are determined to work with regulators and scientists as we move towards phasing out the use of animals. Enabling the properly regulated use of animals, while we move away from animal testing, is essential to improving the health and lives of humans and animals and to the safety and sustainability of our environment.\r\n\r\nThe argument claiming over 90% of drugs fail in human trials, despite being tested on animals, disregards drugs that are tested on animals and found not to be suitable for use in human clinical trials. Drugs fail for a variety of reasons and animals are used for safety screening as well as efficacy modelling. Moreover, not all types of drugs fail at the same rate. Many do better and success rates vary widely by treatment type.\r\n\r\nThe welfare of animals in science is ensured by the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act (ASPA, 1986) and enforced by the Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU). The use of animals in science is highly regulated, including a three-tier system of licensing, which licenses each establishment, project and individual involved in performing regulated procedures involving animals. The UK Home Office regulator conducts an integrated assessment of the compliance of all licence holders, including on-site inspections. The Government has published and enforces standards for the care and accommodation of all animals bred, supplied or used for scientific purposes.\r\n\r\nASPA mandates the development and application of alternative methods, including non-animal methods, as part of implementation of the 3Rs (the Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of animals used in research). Under ASPA, research which uses animals is only conducted where there is no alternative available, using the fewest number of animals and procedures. Until full replacement of the use of animals in science is possible, the UK’s support of refinement approaches, led by the NC3Rs, works to reduce animal suffering as much as possible.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation & Technology ","created_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z"},"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":729212,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729212.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Hold a referendum on leaving the European Court of Human Rights","background":"We want the government to give our population the right to decide if we are to leave the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). We think it is antiquated and not fit for the current world we live in. ","additional_details":"We want it to be replaced with a British Court of Human Rights. We think the government should give the British population the right to choose what matters to our people in our country and what our rules on human rights should be.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11583,"created_at":"2025-06-02T22:54:09.664Z","updated_at":"2026-01-03T00:00:16.346Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-02T07:50:26.550Z","closed_at":"2026-01-02T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-06T18:55:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-21T11:55:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-12T16:29:31.112Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-12","summary":"Leaving the ECHR and the Court would be a costly, self-defeating move, undermining vital security agreements. Reforming it for today’s challenges is smarter than wasting £129m on a referendum.","details":"The European Convention on Human Rights was formed in the wake of the Second World War, partly in response to the Holocaust and other horrors inflicted across Nazi-occupied Europe, and partly in reaction to the rise of totalitarian governments across the post-War Soviet bloc. British politicians and lawyers were among the chief architects of the Convention, and the UK was one of the first States to ratify it. We remain fully committed to protecting human rights both domestically and internationally as the essential underpinning of the liberties and democratic values that we all enjoy, and the ECHR plays an important role in that.\r\n\r\nOur membership of the ECHR also facilitates and strengthens international co-operation on areas ranging from security to irregular migration. It is one of the foundations of peace and stability in Northern Ireland through its role in the Good Friday Agreement, it underpins law enforcement and judicial cooperation via the EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement, and is also an important pillar of the devolution settlements. Since its introduction, the ECHR has made a positive difference to the lives and rights of those in the United Kingdom, including its role in the abolition of corporal punishment, ending the ban on LGBT+ people serving in the armed forces, and the continued abolition of the death penalty.\r\n\r\nOne of the ECHR’s most important provisions is the duty on states to protect an individual’s right to life. The families of the 97 football fans who lost their lives in the 1989 Hillsborough disaster relied on that right as they campaigned to obtain a new inquest, which concluded that the fans were unlawfully killed. Victims of the taxi-cab rapist John Worboys also used the ECHR to claim successfully that the Met Police had failed to investigate Worboys’ crimes effectively and had thereby breached their ECHR rights to protection against ill-treatment. \r\n\r\nWhile the ECHR has played an important role in protecting the rights of UK citizens in the past, it is also true that no set of rules or multilateral institution is perfect; and neither the ECHR nor the European Court of Human Rights should be treated as impervious to change. Indeed, during the UK’s presidency of the Council of Europe in 2012, member states adopted a substantial package of reforms to the ECHR. That included reviewing the way we interpret ECHR provisions that impact asylum and immigration decisions in UK domestic law. \r\n\r\nThe Government’s 2025 Immigration White Paper (Restoring Control over the Immigration System) committed to bring forward legislation to strengthen the public interest test to make it clear that Parliament needs to be able to control our country’s borders and take back control of who comes to, and stays in the UK, striking the right balance between individual rights and the wider public interest.  The government will publish details of a major package of reform to the asylum system before the end of the year, including details of proposed changes to the implementation of the ECHR in the immigration system.\r\n\r\nWe believe that those reforms can be introduced to deliver our migration and criminal justice priorities without having to leave the ECHR, and this will remain our priority over the coming period, rather than delaying those reforms and instead holding an expensive referendum on the UK’s membership of the ECHR. According to the Electoral Commission, it cost £129 million to hold the referendum on membership of the European Union in 2016, so it would cost at least the same amount to hold a new UK-wide referendum on ECHR membership now.\r\n\r\nThe Government welcomes all efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of multilateral institutions, including the European Court of Human Rights. The UK continues to engage with European partners on this issue, and the Prime Minister is leading efforts to build international consensus on strengthening the Convention system. A strengthened Court and Convention system ensures a focus on the most important cases, guaranteeing human rights as an essential element of the rule of law and protecting the dignity of all.\r\n\r\nIn view of Government’s support for the ECHR, it will not support the holding of a referendum on UK membership. However, commitment to the ECHR does not mean complacency. To retain public confidence in our policies on irregular migration, asylum and criminal justice, the ECHR and other instruments must evolve to face modern challenges.\r\n\r\nForeign, Commonwealth & Development Office","created_at":"2025-11-12T16:29:31.108Z","updated_at":"2025-11-12T16:30:04.069Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":734243,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/734243.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Continue Parental Responsibility Automatically when disabled children turn 18","background":"Change the law to automatically allow parents or carers to retain parental responsibility when their disabled child turns 18, if the child lacks capacity and remains in the parent’s care. We think this would remove the need for costly and unnecessary applications to the Court of Protection.","additional_details":"We think parents of disabled children should not be forced to spend thousands of pounds and go through a stressful court process just to continue caring for their child after they turn 18. If a young person lacks capacity and still lives under their parent’s care, their parent should automatically be allowed to advocate, attend appointments and make best-interest decisions. We feel the current system is outdated, discriminatory and creates unnecessary trauma. We think a simple legal amendment could give peace of mind to thousands of families and reduce the pressure on already overstretched services.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":20147,"created_at":"2025-07-23T12:53:47.964Z","updated_at":"2026-02-12T00:00:21.430Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-11T15:36:06.793Z","closed_at":"2026-02-11T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-23T13:21:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-28T21:23:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-12T12:05:57.876Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-12","summary":"The Government has no plans to legislate to allow parental responsibility to continue from age 18 in order to ensure that the best interests of young adults are protected in all cases. ","details":"At present, the Government has no plans to introduce legislation that would allow parental responsibility to continue from age 18 for disabled adults.\r\n\r\nAdults who lack mental capacity are entitled to the same choices and opportunities as the rest of the adult population. The Mental Capacity Act 2005, which applies from age 16, extends the freedoms of adulthood to adults who lack mental capacity.\r\n\r\nBoth the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Court of Protection uphold the fundamental right of the person who lacks mental capacity to make decisions, however limited that decision making ability may be. The court is obliged to consider that person’s ascertainable wishes and feelings, so far as they are able to express them. This empowers the person who lacks capacity and provides an important check, in case other adults, including a parent, are making a decision that is not in the person’s best interests.\r\n\r\nIt is right that applications should be made to the court for an adult to be authorised to make decisions on behalf an adult who lacks mental capacity, and that the law should require those decisions to be made in their best interests to protect all people who lack mental capacity from fraud, scams and abuse. \r\n\r\nThe Court of Protection application process and forms are designed to ensure that they comply with the Mental Capacity Act and provide the court with sufficient information to make the right decision in the first instance and prevent the need to make further applications to the court. \r\n\r\nAn online application process has been introduced to make it easier to make an application. Applications can be made in advance of someone reaching 18. \r\n\r\nApplications to the Court of Protection may be made without legal representation and guidance is available on gov.uk. Help is also available for payment of court application fees via the Help with Fees scheme.\r\n\r\nThe Government recognises that the transition to adulthood can be a challenging time for young disabled people and their families and has produced a toolkit to raise awareness of what arrangements they need to have in place: Making financial decisions for young people who lack capacity - https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/64818cf6b32b9e0012a963fd/making-financial-decisions-for-young-people-who-lack-capacity-parent-carer-toolkit.pdf.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Justice \r\n","created_at":"2025-11-12T12:05:57.874Z","updated_at":"2025-11-12T12:06:43.175Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728912,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728912.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban \"small-scale fracking\" for onshore oil and gas","background":"Fracking forces fluid into rocks to open cracks so oil or gas can flow out. It was banned in 2019 after being blamed for causing earthquakes in shale gas drilling. But the ban only covers fracking with large volumes of fluid. ","additional_details":"We want the ban to be extended to cover activities with smaller volumes of liquid.\r\n\r\nExtracting oil and gas will intensify the impact of climate change. There are companies who have submitted planning applications to use what we see as \"small-scale fracking\" to extract oil and gas. Little is known of the potential risks of this activity. We ask the government to close what we feel is a loophole to help protect communities from harm. We believe not doing so could slow the essential transition towards clean, renewable energy.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10626,"created_at":"2025-05-30T08:26:22.889Z","updated_at":"2026-01-20T14:45:54.743Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-04T11:59:55.382Z","closed_at":"2026-01-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-30T09:47:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-15T15:33:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-11T13:37:44.242Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-15","summary":"We are committed to ending fracking for good. We are aware of local concerns regarding low volume hydraulic fracturing and are keeping this policy under internal review.","details":"This Government is committed to ending new onshore oil and gas licensing in England. This will help make Britain a clean energy superpower to protect current and future generations.\r\n\r\nOn 1 October the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero announced legislation to end new onshore oil and gas licensing in England, including new licences that could be used for high volume hydraulic fracturing for shale gas (commonly known as “fracking”).\r\n\r\nThere is an effective moratorium on high volume hydraulic fracturing for shale gas (“associated hydraulic fracturing” as defined by the Petroleum Act 1998) in England, and this will continue to apply to existing licences. This is in place because of concerns around prediction and management of induced seismicity from this type of hydraulic fracturing. There are similar restrictions in place across other parts of the UK.\r\n\r\nLow volume hydraulic fracturing includes activities such as “proppant squeezes”, which take place at lower volumes than the thresholds for “associated hydraulic fracturing” and in a variety of geological contexts. The small number of these activities are not currently in scope of the effective moratorium in England, which only targeted high volume hydraulic fracturing for shale gas extraction.\r\n\r\nHowever, the government recognises concerns from local communities regarding low volume fracturing and the fact that it is currently treated differently, and is therefore currently reviewing the position with regard to low volume hydraulic fracturing.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Energy Security and Net Zero\r\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/728912)","created_at":"2025-11-11T13:37:44.239Z","updated_at":"2026-01-20T14:45:05.424Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"ESNZ","name":"Department for Energy Security and Net Zero","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-energy-security-and-net-zero"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":737327,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/737327.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Require non-stunned and stunned meat to be labelled accordingly","background":"We think it should be required that the labelling of non-stunned and stunned meat be clearly labelled throughout the food chain. This includes shops, supermarkets, suppliers, fast food and restaurants","additional_details":"This would include labels on every product available to consumers\r\nWe think UK government should implement mandatory method of slaughter labelling for all meat products Stunned or Non-Stunned. For all industries linked to food, including but not limited to shops, supermarkets, schools, restaurants, fast food, cafes and suppliers\r\n\r\nWe think this promotes consumer choice, enhances transparency, especially for religion and ethics\r\n\r\nWe think no one should be forced to consume food which doesn't meet their ethical and religious choices, they should have the right to choose without prejudice","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":115954,"created_at":"2025-08-12T21:54:34.983Z","updated_at":"2026-03-02T17:35:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-01T15:46:45.172Z","closed_at":"2026-03-01T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-12T22:46:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-17T23:25:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-10T16:01:22.926Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-24T10:11:20.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-22","summary":"Whilst there is no regulatory requirement for labelling of meat from animals slaughtered without stunning, any information of this nature must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer.","details":"The government encourages the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter and would prefer all animals to be stunned before slaughter, but the government respects the rights of Jews and Muslims to eat meat prepared in accordance with their religious beliefs. The first national legislative requirement for stunning before slaughter was – in England and Wales – the Slaughter of Animals Act 1933. The Act also introduced an exception from the requirement to stun when animals are slaughtered in accordance with religious rites, for the food of Muslims and Jews.\r\n\r\nWhilst currently there are no regulations that require the labelling of meat from animals slaughtered without stunning, where any information of this nature is provided it must be accurate and must not be misleading to the consumer. Additionally, major retailers have sourcing policies requiring that fresh meat comes from animals that have been stunned before slaughter. They may operate limited concessions for halal or kosher food that will be clearly labelled. Some farm assurance schemes, such as Red Tractor and RSPCA Assured, require stunning before slaughter.\r\n\r\nA consultation on proposals to improve and extend current method of production labelling was undertaken last year by the previous government. The consultation sought views on options for the production standards behind the label, including the period of life which should be covered by the standards. The government’s response to this consultation is available on https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/fairer-food-labelling. The government will consider the potential role of this labelling as part of the ongoing development of the government’s wider animal welfare strategy. This includes consideration of the period of life that could be covered by labelling standards, up to and including whether the animal is stunned before slaughter. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\r\n\r\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/737327","created_at":"2025-11-10T16:01:22.924Z","updated_at":"2026-01-13T15:46:40.358Z"},"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":731016,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/731016.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban greyhound racing","background":"Greyhound racing kills and injures dogs. From 2017–2023, 1,230 dogs died trackside, many more were destroyed, and there were over 31,000 injuries. We believe it’s time to follow Wales and ban this cruel sport.","additional_details":"The industry breeds more dogs than are needed for racing - approximately 15,000-20,000 dogs are bred in Ireland each year, and some are also bred in Britain. We are concerned that dogs live in poor kennel conditions, and overbreeding creates a surplus, overwhelming rescue centres.\r\n \r\nA 2019 RTÉ documentary estimated up to 6,000 greyhounds are killed annually for not being fast enough. There are concerns about greyhounds being exported to countries with poor welfare laws.\r\n \r\nWe believe no animal should suffer for sport or entertainment. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":55580,"created_at":"2025-06-20T14:34:28.151Z","updated_at":"2026-01-31T18:34:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-30T08:54:11.284Z","closed_at":"2026-01-30T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-20T14:52:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-05T10:10:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-30T09:44:15.062Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-30","summary":"The government has no plans to ban greyhound racing. The government considers it a well-regulated sport and recognises the contribution it makes to many people’s lives as well as to the economy.","details":"The government has no plans to ban greyhound racing. While the government recognises the concerns some people have about greyhound racing, there is legislation in place to protect the welfare of racing greyhounds in England and a regulatory body – the Greyhound Board of Great Britain (GBGB) – that has made many improvements to greyhound welfare.   \r\n\r\nThe government also recognises the important contribution greyhound racing makes to the country’s cultural life and its rural economy, providing some 5400 jobs across Great Britain as well as being the sixth most popular sport in terms of viewership.  \r\n\r\nThe welfare of racing greyhounds in England is covered by the Animal Welfare Act 2006 and the Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010. The 2006 Act allows action to be taken where there is evidence of cruelty to an animal or a failure to provide for an animal’s welfare needs. This includes where greyhounds are raced at tracks or kept at trainers’ kennels. Further to these general provisions, welfare standards at all English greyhound tracks are set by the 2010 Regulations.\r\n\r\nThe 2010 Regulations include the requirement that all tracks must have a vet present while dogs are running, who must inspect each greyhound intended to run in every race, trial, or sales trial to ensure that the greyhound is fit to run. Temperature-controlled kennelling must also be provided at the track, and all racing greyhounds must be permanently identified. Tracks must also keep records of any injuries sustained to greyhounds while at the track. \r\n\r\nStandards in the 2010 Regulations can be enforced either by the local authority or by GBGB. GBGB’s ability to regulate track standards in the 2010 Regulations is allowed for in law because they are accredited by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS). UKAS is the UK’s National Accreditation Body, recognised by the government as the sole UK organisation for the accreditation of certification and inspection bodies. UKAS provides independent, external oversight of GBGB’s performance as a regulator of track standards.  \r\n\r\nIn addition, GBGB has also introduced several welcome welfare initiatives. In collaboration with animal welfare groups, the GBGB has developed a set of detailed welfare standards for trainers’ kennels, which are then verified at trainers’ kennels by independent auditors, with this process also accredited by UKAS. On average, GBGB licensed kennels will be inspected three times a year by GBGB staff, as well as by a vet and an independent inspector.  \r\n\r\nThe GBGB has also introduced a Greyhound Retirement Scheme to contribute towards rehoming costs; as well as an Injury Recovery Scheme to provide financial support to trainers to treat career-ending injuries to greyhounds, where otherwise they might be put to sleep.   \r\n\r\nIn 2022, the GBGB published its long term, national welfare strategy: ‘A Good Life for Every Greyhound’ (https://www.gbgb.org.uk/welfare-care/commitment-to-care/). The strategy focuses not only on further reducing risks of injury but also developing and implementing new management practices to improve the welfare of greyhounds throughout their lives, including after racing.  \r\n\r\nSince 2018 GBGB have published yearly, independently audited injury, fatality and retirement figures. The overall, long-term trend for injuries and fatalities for racing greyhounds since 2018 has shown significant improvements. For example: the total number of GBGB registered greyhounds reported to have died has declined from 1013 deaths in 2017, to 386 in 2024; and the total number of greyhounds put to sleep due to the costs of treating injuries has fallen from 333 in 2017, to 3 in 2024.\r\n\r\nGiven the work being undertaken to improve greyhound welfare, and the protections in place, the government does not believe it is necessary to ban greyhound racing. However, the government will continue to monitor GBGB’s progress and, should further measures and protections be required, the government will consider options that are targeted, effective, and proportionate. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-10-30T09:44:15.059Z","updated_at":"2025-10-30T09:45:10.094Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DCMS","name":"Department for Culture, Media and Sport","url":""}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":719429,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/719429.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Funding for Hyperemesis Gravidarum care","background":"We call on the UK Government to provide funding to improve physical and mental healthcare for sufferers, increase training, eliminate inequities in access and treatment as well as ensure HG sufferers have access to mental health support within 2 weeks of referral.","additional_details":"Up to 30,000 people will suffer with HG in 2025, all 8 times more likely to develop antenatal depression than other pregnant people. Hyperemesis gravidarum is not “morning sickness”—it is a debilitating pregnancy condition that profoundly impacts physical and mental health. For too long, we feel the suffering of women with HG has been dismissed. We feel HG sufferers remain excluded from the services they desperately need.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11548,"created_at":"2025-02-27T12:17:39.295Z","updated_at":"2025-10-30T09:45:35.890Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-07T12:45:07.018Z","closed_at":"2025-10-07T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-27T12:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-07T20:31:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-29T17:06:47.672Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-29","summary":"DHSC recognises Hyperemesis Gravidarum (HG) can have a devastating impact on women and families. A range of fully-funded physical and mental health support is already available for women with HG.","details":"Funding\r\n\r\nThe Department of Health and Social Care recognises that Hyperemesis Gravidarum (HG) is a debilitating condition that can have a devastating impact on women and their families. This Government is committed to prioritising women’s health, and we are delivering our manifesto commitment that never again will women’s health be neglected.\r\n\r\nWe are determined to make sure that all pregnant women receive the safe, personalised and compassionate care they deserve. A number of measures are already in place to ensure women with HG are listened to and supported, with understanding around the seriousness of the condition and possible complications to both their physical and mental health. There is currently no funding or planned spends specifically allocated to HG care within the Spending Review.\r\n\r\nTraining\r\n\r\nThe standard of training for healthcare professionals is the responsibility of the independent statutory regulatory bodies who set the outcome standards expected at undergraduate level and approve courses. Higher Education Institutions write and teach the curricula content that enables their students to meet the regulators’ outcome standards.\r\n\r\nWhilst not all curricula may necessarily highlight a specific condition, they all nevertheless emphasise the skills and approaches a healthcare professional must develop in order to ensure accurate and timely diagnoses and treatment plans for their patients.\r\n\r\nIt is the responsibility of individual employers to invest in the future of their workforce and ensure appropriate ongoing training and continuing professional development to ensure they continue to provide safe and effective care.\r\n\r\nInequities in accessing treatment\r\n\r\nDecisions about what medicines to prescribe are made by the doctor or healthcare professional responsible for that part of the patient’s care. Prescribers are accountable for their prescribing decisions.\r\n\r\nPrescribers must always satisfy themselves that the medicines they consider appropriate for their patients can be safely prescribed and that they take account of appropriate national guidance on clinical effectiveness, as well as the local commissioning decisions of their respective integrated care boards.\r\n\r\nThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence’s guideline on antenatal care includes advantages and disadvantages of different pharmacological treatments for nausea and vomiting in pregnancy to support shared decision making.\r\n\r\nMental health\r\n\r\nAnyone experiencing mental health problems, including those with HG, can seek help from their GP or through their local NHS Talking Therapies service. Information on how to access NHS mental health services and where to get urgent help is available on the NHS website at: https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/mental-health-services/.\r\n\r\nThe waiting time standard for NHS Talking Therapies services is that 75% of patients should have their first appointment within six weeks of referral, and 95% should be seen within 18 weeks. The latest NHS Talking Therapies data (for June 2025) that shows show 89.1% of people completing treatment waited less than 6 weeks for their first appointment.\r\n\r\nFor 2025/26, mental health spending is forecast to amount to £15.6 billion. This represents a significant uplift of £688 million in real terms spending on mental health compared to the previous financial year.\r\n\r\nMental health services are available for women who have pre-existing mental health needs prior to their pregnancy, as well as for those who experience mental health difficulties during or as a result of their pregnancy or labour. Mental health services are provided for these women through specialist perinatal mental health (PMH) services, maternal mental health services (MMHS) and Mother and Baby Units (MBUs).\r\n\r\nWomen can be referred to PMH services, MMHS or MBUs by any healthcare professional, including midwives, health visitors, GPs, hospital-based teams, mental health services and social workers. Self-referrals are accepted by some services.\r\n\r\nSignificant progress has been made to ensure women experiencing moderate to severe and complex perinatal mental health conditions can access specialist perinatal mental health services, including:\r\n\r\n•\t165 MBU beds have now been commissioned (153 currently operational) providing inpatient care to women who experience severe mental health difficulties during and after pregnancy.\r\n\r\n•\tAs of June 2025, MMHS are available in all parts of England. These services provide care for women with moderate/severe or complex mental health difficulties arising from birth trauma or loss in the maternity/neonatal context.\r\n\r\n•\tA record 63,858 women accessed a specialist community PMH service or MMHS in the 12 months to February 2025. This is a 109% increase from March 2020 (30,625).\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-10-29T17:06:47.670Z","updated_at":"2025-10-29T17:08:22.366Z"},"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":736504,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/736504.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Inquiry into sexual violence in NHS hospitals","background":"I want the Government to have an inquiry into sexual violence being reported in NHS hospitals, to come up with a plan to reduce incidents.","additional_details":"I want the Government to do this because it appears to be a problem across the nation. I think the users of the NHS need to be aware and take necessary precautions to stay safe and it is not getting the investigations and media coverage it deserves.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":25944,"created_at":"2025-08-07T13:51:38.885Z","updated_at":"2026-03-09T22:48:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-08T12:19:52.280Z","closed_at":"2026-03-08T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-08T18:13:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-30T07:32:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T15:33:38.154Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-23","summary":"Sexual misconduct in NHS settings is unacceptable. We are working with system partners to eradicate sexual misconduct in the NHS. The Government has no plans to launch an inquiry at this time.","details":"We are ensuring health care leaders in the NHS take robust, compassionate action to address and reduce all forms of sexual misconduct and harassment within their organisations and to ensure a safe environment for staff and patients.\r\nIt is entirely unacceptable for anyone to experience any form of sexual misconduct, including violence and harassment, within NHS settings.\r\n\r\nSince 2023, the NHS Sexual Safety Charter – which promotes a zero tolerance approach towards sexual misconduct in the NHS – has been adopted by every Integrated Care Board (ICB) and NHS Trust in England. The Charter asks all ICBs and Trusts (all of which have an executive-level lead for domestic abuse and sexual violence) to adopt particular standards in the identification and investigation of staff sexual misconduct cases.\r\n\r\nTo support delivery of the Charter, NHS England has developed a national NHS people policy framework on sexual misconduct, e-learning for all staff on sexual misconduct, a communications toolkit, and an assurance framework for Charter implementation.\r\n\r\nThese resources provide information about how to recognise, report and act on sexual misconduct; an approach to taking action when a report is made; and the support available to people involved or harmed. The sexual misconduct policy framework, for Trusts and ICBs to adopt and adapt, sets out how reports should be handled. NHS England is measuring the uptake of the framework across all Trusts and ICBs, including gathering key feedback about its impact and effectiveness so far. Feedback will be used to identify areas where organisations need support with implementation to achieve an accountable sexual safety culture.\r\n\r\nNHS England has recently written to providers and asked them to take further steps to identify potential perpetrators of sexual misconduct and to redouble efforts to protect staff and patients.\r\n\r\nThe Professional Standards Authority has produced guidance on sexual boundaries to support professional regulators, such as the General Medical Council (GMC) and the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), in meeting their statutory duty to investigate concerns raised about healthcare professionals. For example, the GMC has published new resources including new GMC resources to support victims and survivors of sexual misconduct by doctors. The Government has also confirmed its commitment to prioritising the reform of healthcare professional regulation in the UK. This includes modernising the regulatory framework for doctors and, as part of that, removing the GMC’s five-year rule which restricts the GMC from investigating some historic concerns such as allegations of sexual misconduct.\r\n\r\nThe Government’s 10 Year Health Plan sets out standards for the NHS workforce and will be produced in conjunction with the Social Partnership Forum. These include reducing the levels of violence and sexual harassment against staff.\r\n\r\nThe Care Quality Commission (CQC) addresses sexual safety within its Assessment Framework, assessing if providers have cultures and processes to protect people from sexual harm. CQC uses analysis of the NHS Staff Survey questions relating to sexual safety, incidents data and complaints data, among other evidence, to make informed decisions. Where CQC finds that NHS services do not prevent sexual misconduct, it can act using regulatory powers, or by referring the service to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.\r\n\r\nThe NHS Staff Survey now includes two new questions on unwanted behaviour of a sexual nature. These help trusts understand the prevalence of sexual misconduct in their workplace and informs further action to protect and support staff across the NHS.\r\n\r\nThe Equality Act 2010 gives legal protections against sexual harassment at work. Yet, reports in recent years show that it remains a problem. To address this, a new duty on employers to take ‘reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment of their employees came into force on 26 October 2024. The Government will strengthen this duty through the Employment Rights Bill, clarifying that employers must take ‘all reasonable steps’ to prevent sexual harassment of their employees and for employers not to permit the harassment of their employees by third parties. The Bill includes a measure that will expressly make sexual harassment the basis for a protected disclosure. This will provide clarity for workers and have benefits, including encouraging workers to speak up about sexual harassment by using whistleblowing routes.\r\n\r\nSexual Assault Referral Centres offer medical, practical and emotional support to anyone who has been raped, sexually assaulted or abused, and are available to all victims and survivors of sexual violence and abuse, whether recent or non-recent.\r\n\r\nNHS England, ICBs, providers, professional regulators and the wider system represent an urgent and collective effort to enact positive change and eradicate the abhorrent behaviours described in various independent reports about sexual misconduct in the NHS.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-23T15:33:38.151Z","updated_at":"2025-10-23T15:34:29.789Z"},"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":738192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum noise level for consumer fireworks from 120 to 90 decibels","background":"We think each year, individuals suffer because of loud fireworks. We believe horses, dogs, cats, livestock and wildlife can be terrified by noisy fireworks and many people find them intolerable.","additional_details":"There is independent research suggesting: \r\n\r\n• Over half of dog owners report fireworks-anxiety in their dog\r\n• There’s an 81% increase in missing dogs around Bonfire Night\r\n• Almost 25% of military veterans say fireworks have caused a negative experience for them\r\n\r\nWe think both humans and animals are less likely to be distressed by fireworks noise below 90dB. We believe lower noise levels would allow fireworks to be enjoyed while potentially reducing some of their many negative impacts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":184376,"created_at":"2025-08-18T08:48:05.528Z","updated_at":"2026-03-05T00:00:16.589Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T13:29:13.913Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-18T09:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T15:43:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.890Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T14:00:10.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:22:32.649Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-07","summary":"The Government recognises that some people have strong feelings about fireworks and has been listening to concerns raised by members of the public regarding the impact of firework noise.","details":"The Government's intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property.  Current regulations control their sale, availability, and use, including setting a maximum noise level of 120 decibels for consumer fireworks. Many retailers also offer ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks which are available to purchase by consumers.\r\n\r\nFireworks, when used responsibly are a source of enjoyment for many people.  The Government recognises however the concerns raised by signatories to this petition regarding the potential impact fireworks can have on communities and animals.  \r\n\r\nThe Government is engaging with businesses, consumer groups and charities to better understand the issues with and impacts of fireworks. Noise is one of the key issues we are seeking views on. The Government is also considering the experience of other countries where lower noise limits are in place for consumer fireworks to understand the impact this has had and to identify best practice.\r\n \r\nFor this fireworks season, to ensure people continue to use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner, the Government has launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside considerate use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.  The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks.  \r\n\r\nMy safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\r\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\r\n\r\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade\r\n\r\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192)","created_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.887Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T15:28:36.600Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":740486,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/740486.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce a Pension Tax Lock to help protect retirement savings and incentives","background":"The Chancellor should introduce a Pension Tax Lock: a commitment not to reduce the amount people can withdraw from their pension tax-free or the amount of tax relief given on pension contributions. We believe this would help ensure retirement savings are protected and people can save with confidence","additional_details":"We believe this simple commitment could put an end to the speculation seen ahead of every Budget – speculation which we think erodes confidence in long-term saving and can all-too-often lead to people making poor, sometimes irreversible, financial decisions.\r\n\r\nWe think this would come at zero cost to the Exchequer and would allow people to save for retirement with more confidence. We feel it could support the government’s twin aims of delivering pensions adequacy and boosting economic growth.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":23180,"created_at":"2025-09-08T16:01:24.429Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T11:03:20.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-01T09:23:29.787Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-08T17:46:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T19:03:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-22T14:15:15.792Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Michael Glenister","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-10","summary":"The Government is committed to ensuring pensioners have security in retirement and has launched a Pensions Commission to look at what is required to ensure the system is strong, fair and sustainable. ","details":"The Government wishes to encourage pension saving, to help ensure that people have an income, or funds on which they can draw on, throughout retirement. The Government is committed to supporting savers at all stages of life. That is why, for the majority of savers, pension contributions made from income during working life are tax-free. This is known as 'pensions tax relief'. This relief is available at an individual's marginal rate. For example, contributions from a basic rate (20 per cent) taxpayer who contributes to a registered pension scheme in 2025/26 receives tax relief at 20 per cent. This makes pensions tax relief one of the most expensive reliefs in the personal tax system, costing £78 billion in 2023/24.\r\n\r\nInvestment growth of assets in a pension scheme is also not subject to tax. From age 55 (or when scheme rules allow a pension to be taken), up to 25 per cent of the pension can be taken tax-free (capped for most at a maximum of £268,275), depending on scheme rules. Pension income received (for example as a regular annuity payment or as income drawn down from a pension) is subject to income tax at an individual's marginal rate, to reflect the fact that pensions in payment are a form of deferred income and have not been previously taxed.\r\n\r\nThe petition proposes a ‘Pension Tax Lock: a commitment not to reduce the amount people can withdraw from their pension tax-free or the amount of tax relief given on pension contributions’.\r\n\r\nAt Autumn Budget 2025 the Government announced that it is changing how salary sacrifice for pension contributions works – from April 2029, the amount that is exempt from National Insurance contributions (NICs) will be capped at £2,000 a year for employee contributions made via salary sacrifice. More information on this change is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-salary-sacrifice-for-pensions-from-april-2029\r\n\r\nThe government made no changes at Autumn Budget to the pension lump sum tax-free allowance, or to income tax relief on employee pension contributions. The Government keeps all aspects of the tax system under review as part of the annual Budget process, and in the context of the wider public finances, and does not intend to introduce a pensions tax lock.\r\n\r\nThe Government recognises the importance of promoting confidence in pension saving and is committed to ensuring future generations of pensioners have security in retirement. This is why the government announced a landmark two-phased review of the pensions system days after coming into office.\r\n\r\nThe first phase, the Pensions Investment Review, focused on reforming the pensions landscape to boost savers’ pension pots. These reforms will be delivered through the Pension Schemes Bill. The Pensions Commission will build on these foundations and make recommendations to the government on the broader questions of adequacy, fairness, and sustainability to guide the long-term future of our pensions system. The Pensions Commission will be undertaken by Baroness Jeannie Drake, Sir Ian Cheshire and Professor Nick Pearce.\r\n\r\nMore information on the Pensions Commission, including its Terms of Reference, is available here:\r\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pensions-commission-terms-of-reference\r\n\r\nHM Treasury\r\n\r\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/740486)","created_at":"2025-10-22T14:15:15.789Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T18:03:33.939Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":714927,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/714927.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop airport expansion: halt all airport expansion plans across the UK","background":"More than 20 airports across the UK have expansion plans, which will result in a combined increase of 60%+ capacity. More flights means more emissions, at a time when we should be doing everything we can to reduce emissions and avert climate catastrophe.","additional_details":"More flights also mean more noise and air pollution, which is linked to poor physical and mental health for those living near airports.\r\n \r\nThe Climate Change Committee says there should be no net airport expansion unless aviation is outperforming its emission baselines. Local people and politicians oppose airport expansion plans, but central government can overrule their decisions.\r\n \r\nWe think airports are big enough. Stop airport expansion.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10998,"created_at":"2025-01-22T18:22:11.770Z","updated_at":"2025-10-21T14:14:14.490Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-24T13:41:26.813Z","closed_at":"2025-09-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-22T19:04:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-16T10:50:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-21T14:13:04.069Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-21","summary":"The Government supports airport expansion where it promotes economic growth, aligns with climate commitments, and meets strict air quality and noise pollution requirements.","details":"UK connectivity is vital to supporting jobs, opportunity, and businesses across the length and breadth of the country. The government is committed to securing the long-term future of the UK’s aviation sector, and if the UK is to remain competitive as a global leader in aviation, it is crucial that aviation infrastructure remains world-class.\r\n\r\nCapacity constraints are hindering the ability of UK aviation to grow – which means demand will outstrip supply. The Government therefore supports airport expansion where expansion proposals can demonstrate that they contribute to economic growth, can be delivered in line with the UK’s legally binding climate change commitments and meets strict environmental requirements on air quality and noise pollution.\r\n\r\nAirports support regional and economic growth. This Government has granted additional capacity at Gatwick, London City and Luton, with other airports, such as Leeds Bradford and Stansted, also taking forward expansion plans.\r\n\r\nHeathrow is operating at full capacity, putting UK connectivity, competitiveness, and the benefits of a hub airport at risk. A hub airport enables global connectivity, attracting international investment, boosting trade, and sustaining routes that would not be viable without transfer passengers – thereby amplifying the UK’s role in the global economy. As rivals like Istanbul and Frankfurt expand, the UK risks falling behind. To secure Heathrow’s future and support growth, the Government is therefore assessing proposals for a third runway.\r\n\r\nFollowing the conclusion of the assessment process, the Climate Change Committee will be engaged throughout the review of the Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS), ensuring independent oversight and advice during the process.\r\n\r\nWe understand people will have environmental concerns. The Government is actively investing into innovation in making aviation more sustainable, to ensure that we can achieve net zero aviation by 2050. Key initiatives include the introduction of a Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) Mandate, a Revenue Certainty Mechanism to encourage investment in UK SAF production, and £63 million in funding for 2025/26 through the Advanced Fuels Fund to support domestic SAF supply – with more funding committed across the next Spending Review period. The UK will also set out detailed plans for meeting legislated carbon budgets later this year as part of its wider approach to fulfilling climate obligations.\r\n\r\nEfforts are also underway to deliver quicker, quieter and cleaner air travel through airspace modernisation. This includes consultations on designing more direct and efficient flight paths.\r\n\r\nTo support the transition to low and zero carbon aircraft, the Aerospace Technology Institute (ATI) Programme is backing innovation in next-generation sustainable technologies. As part of the Industrial Strategy, up to £2.3 billion has been allocated over 10 years to extend this programme.\r\n\r\nIn terms of noise reduction, measures such as noise abatement procedures and night flight restrictions are in place at major airports, including Heathrow. Alongside the use of more modern quieter aircraft, these steps have contributed to a reduction of up to 40% in areas affected by significant noise levels and a decrease in population exposure of up to 37%.\r\n\r\nSustainable aviation growth remains a priority. Airport expansion plays a key role in this, supporting job creation, attracting investment, and maintaining the UK’s position as a global leader in aviation.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Transport","created_at":"2025-10-21T14:13:04.067Z","updated_at":"2025-10-21T14:13:50.597Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":734246,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/734246.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Hold a referendum on introducing mandatory identity cards in the UK","background":"We urge the Government to hold a referendum on any proposal to introduce identity cards, including the proposed “BritCard.” We oppose the implementation of a mandatory national identity card system, as we believe it could risk turning personal identification into a tool for state control.","additional_details":"We urge the Government and Parliament to continue to allow freedom of speech and freedom of movement which are protected under the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates rights from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law. We believe the “BritCard” could contravene this.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":24137,"created_at":"2025-07-23T13:31:38.722Z","updated_at":"2026-02-14T00:00:01.856Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-13T09:33:09.148Z","closed_at":"2026-02-13T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-23T14:47:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T14:48:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-20T08:09:41.876Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-20","summary":"We have no plans to hold a referendum on the new digital identity scheme. There will be other ways for people to join a national conversation, including through a forthcoming consultation.","details":"The Government will not introduce a scheme called “BritCard”. However, the Prime Minister has recently announced we are working on a national, UK-wide digital identity scheme. It will not be a card, but a digital pass which will be fit for the needs of a modern UK, and will be fully compliant with our international legal and human rights obligations. The pass will be mandatory for right to work checks, but not otherwise compulsory. We will launch an extensive public consultation in the coming weeks.\r\n   \r\nWe are committed to making people’s everyday lives easier and more secure, to putting more control in their hands (including over their own data), and to driving growth through harnessing digital technology. We also want to learn from countries which have digitised government services for the benefit of their citizens, in line with our manifesto commitment to modernise government.\r\n \r\nCurrently, when UK citizens and residents use public services, start a new job, or, for example, buy alcohol, they often need to present an assortment of physical documents to prove who they are or things about themselves. This is both bureaucratic for the individual and creates space for abuse and fraud. This includes known issues with illegal working and modern slavery, while the fragmented approach and multiple systems across Government make it frustrating for people to access vital services. Further, there are too many people who are excluded, like the 1 in 10 UK adults who don’t have a physical photo ID, so can struggle to prove who they are and access the products and services to which they are entitled.\r\n \r\nTo tackle these interlinked issues, we will introduce a new national digital pass which will be available for free to all UK citizens and legal residents aged 16 and over. Over time, people will be able to use it to seamlessly access a range of public and private sector services, with the aim of making our everyday lives easier and more secure.\r\n\r\nThe new scheme will build on GOV.UK One Login and the GOV.UK Wallet to drive the transformation of public services. Over time, this system will allow people to access government services – such as benefits or tax records – without needing to remember multiple logins or provide physical documents. It will significantly streamline interactions with the state, saving time and reducing frustrating paperwork, while also helping to create opportunities for more joined up government services. International examples show how beneficial this can be. For instance, Estonia’s system reportedly saves each citizen hours every month by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, and the move to becoming a digital society has saved taxpayer money.\r\n  \r\nBy the end of this Parliament, employers will have to check the new digital pass when conducting a ‘right to work’ check. This will help combat criminal gangs who promise access to the UK labour market to profit from dangerous and illegal channel crossings. It will create a fairer system between UK citizens and legal residents, crack down on forged documents, and streamline the process for employers, driving up compliance. Further, it will create business information showing where employers are conducting checks, so driving more targeted action against employers who aren’t playing by the rules.\r\n \r\nFor clarity, it will not be a criminal offence to not hold a digital pass and police will not be able to demand to see a digital pass as part of a “stop and search”.\r\n \r\nPrivacy and security will be central to the new national digital pass scheme. We will follow data protection law and best practice in creating a system which people can rightly put their trust in. Many of us already trust our money with online banking. The new system will be built on similar technology, using advanced security and encryption, and be your boarding pass to government. Digitally checkable digital credentials are more secure than physical documents which can be lost, copied or forged, and often mean sharing more information than necessary for a given transaction. The new system will be designed in accordance with the highest security standards, working with the National Cyber Security Centre and the foremost experts, to protect against a comprehensive range of threats, including cyber-attacks.\r\n  \r\nWe have no plans to hold a referendum on the new digital pass scheme. There will be other ways to join a national conversation about digital identity, and we’re keen to make sure as many people as possible have the opportunity to contribute their views. We will launch an extensive public consultation in the coming weeks and work closely with employers, trade unions, devolved administrations, civil society groups and other stakeholders, to design the scheme and ensure it is as secure and inclusive as possible, learning from other countries with such schemes. Following consultation, we will seek to bring forward legislation to underpin this system that will protect security, privacy and civil liberties.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-20T08:09:41.873Z","updated_at":"2025-10-20T08:10:33.169Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":721825,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/721825.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review and support the continued operation of pubs to prevent more closures","background":"Review ways to assist the hospitality industry and support our nations pubs before we lose any more.\r\n\r\nWe feel that without Government assistance, independent breweries and pubs cannot swallow the hikes in business rates, the living wage and rising operating costs.","additional_details":"We believe pubs are the backbone of our communities and vital in maintaining mental health and social interaction in many communities across the UK. In some cases, these are the only places that people have any kind of social contact.\r\nWe feel that far too many have been lost over the last 30 years due to a lack of support for the industry and we simply cannot continue on this course. We believe that pubs are our history, our heritage and have been our way of life for hundreds of years.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":12488,"created_at":"2025-03-10T19:02:26.546Z","updated_at":"2025-10-16T13:46:59.323Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-08T10:56:30.865Z","closed_at":"2025-10-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-10T21:25:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-28T17:19:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-16T13:44:33.778Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-16","summary":"We recognise hospitality’s vital role in our communities and are supporting the sector through targeted action, cutting red tape, removing barriers, and creating conditions for businesses to thrive.","details":"Government recognises that hospitality businesses, including pubs, are not only central to our history and heritage but also play a crucial role in boosting local economies and bringing people together.\r\n \r\nThe hospitality sector continues to face real and sustained pressures, with rising costs and reduced demand placing strain on businesses. These challenges reflect wider economic conditions, and while the Government inherited a difficult fiscal position requiring tough decisions, it remains committed to supporting the sectors most affected.\r\n \r\nThat is why we are reforming business rates and intend to introduce permanently lower tax rates for retail, hospitality, and leisure (RHL) properties with rateable values below £500,000, from 2026-27. This permanent tax cut will ensure that RHL businesses benefit from much-needed certainty and support. We also prevented RHL relief from ending in April 2025 by extending it for one year at 40 per cent up to a cash cap of £110,000 per business and frozen the small business multiplier. By extending the relief, the Government has saved the average pub, with a rateable value of £16,800, over £3,300.\r\n \r\nWe also reduced alcohol duty on qualifying draught products, representing an overall reduction in duty bills of over £85m a year. To assist independent breweries, we’re currently assessing the beer market to determine whether there are any barriers preventing small brewers' from accessing pubs.\r\n \r\nThe Government has taken several difficult but necessary decisions on tax, welfare, and spending to fix the public finances, fund public services, and restore economic stability. One of the toughest decisions we took was to raise the rate of employer National Insurance contributions (NICs) from 13.8% to 15%, whilst reducing the per-employee threshold at which employers start to pay National Insurance (the Secondary Threshold) from £9,100 to £5,000. The hospitality sector is predominately made up of smaller businesses. The Government protected the smallest businesses from these changes by increasing the Employment Allowance from £5,000 to £10,500. This means that this year, 865,000 employers will pay no NICs at all, and more than half of all employers will either gain or will see no change.\r\n\r\nThrough the English Devolution Bill, we will introduce a strong new ‘right to buy’ for valued community assets, such as empty shops, pubs and community spaces. This measure will empower local people to bring community spaces back into community ownership and end the blight of empty premises on our high streets. Via the Hospitality Support Scheme the Government is co-funding projects such as Pub Is The Hub to help community pubs adapt to changing local needs, ensuring these vital social hubs continue delivering for their communities.\r\n\r\nAdditional support includes our recently launched plan for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) which delivers the most comprehensive package for SMEs, in a generation. Part of this plan includes introducing a new National Licensing Policy Framework to simplify outdated rules, making it quicker, easier, and more affordable to open and run hospitality venues, while helping small businesses grow and communities thrive.\r\n \r\nNew ‘hospitality zones will fast-track permissions for alfresco dining, pubs, bars and street parties, reforms will protect long-standing venues from noise complaints by new developments. Government is committed to ensuring that planning and licensing systems work fairly for both businesses and residents. We strongly encourage anyone with an interest in these issues to contribute via the Call for Evidence. \r\n\r\nYou can respond online on the GOV.UK Website: https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/reforming-the-licensing-system\r\n\r\nThe deadline for responses is midday on 6 November 2025. The call for evidence focuses on those proposals where the Taskforce indicated there is potential for the greatest benefit. Other proposals, including some Taskforce recommendations, will be considered further in due course and consulted as appropriate.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-10-16T13:44:33.776Z","updated_at":"2025-10-16T13:46:27.324Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728765,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728765.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Review all trade ties with Israel, suspend 2030 roadmap & impose trade sanctions","background":"We call on the Government to review existing trade ties with Israel, suspend the 2030 Roadmap for UK-Israel bilateral relations and impose trade sanctions upon Israel.","additional_details":"We are concerned that innocent people, including children, are suffering and dying in Gaza, and we feel the UK is not taking enough action. I oppose any violence against civilians and was horrified by Hamas's attack of October 2023. I believe Gaza's current Hamas leadership should be brought to justice but I believe this does not justify what is happening to ordinary people in Gaza. As UK citizens, we ask the Government to take action against Israel.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11502,"created_at":"2025-05-28T11:11:50.430Z","updated_at":"2026-01-11T11:58:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-10T17:04:50.530Z","closed_at":"2026-01-10T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-30T15:39:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-30T17:54:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-16T09:40:33.437Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-16","summary":"We believe the quickest, most effective way to end the war and humanitarian crisis in Gaza is not through trade sanctions, but through ensuring the success of the peace initiative currently under way.","details":"This Government came to power in July 2024 determined to secure an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all the remaining hostages held by Hamas, the unrestricted flow of aid into Gaza to tackle the escalating humanitarian crisis, and the restoration of a path to long-term peace and stability in the Middle East.\r\n\r\nOver the last fifteen months, we have taken decisive action in support of these goals: restoring funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency; providing nearly £250 million in development assistance; coordinating international condemnation of the humanitarian crisis; and evacuating groups of sick and injured children to receive medical treatment in the UK.\r\n \r\nWe suspended negotiations on a new trade deal with Israel; suspended the export of arms and military equipment that could be used in Gaza; and imposed three rounds of sanctions on violent Israeli settlers and members of the Israeli cabinet. \r\nAnd, after signing a landmark agreement with the Palestinian Authority to support their ambitious reform agenda, we took the historic step last month of formally recognising a Palestinian state, with no future role for Hamas, to protect the viability of a two-state solution and create a path towards a just and lasting peace, with security for the Israeli and Palestinian people alike.\r\n\r\nWe are now working tirelessly with our partners across the world to build support and momentum for the US peace initiative, which offers the quickest and most effective path to achieving the goals we have been working towards over the last year, and which – at the time of writing – is already creating hope of progress. \r\nThere is a long way still to go, but at this time, the efforts of all governments and all people of goodwill should be focused on supporting that effort to stop the bloodshed, release the hostages, end the humanitarian crisis, and restore a framework for peace.\r\n\r\nThe UK government does not believe that accepting the petitioners’ proposals at this time would contribute to that effort, and would risk punishing British businesses and workers without making any positive difference to the current situation in the Middle East, especially since the export of arms and military equipment for use in Gaza has already been suspended.\r\n\r\nAs a whole, UK exports to Israel were worth £3.3 billion in the twelve months ending March 2025, compared to £2.5 billion in Israeli exports to the UK. Those UK exports supported around 38,100 jobs in the UK in the last year for which data is available, particularly in advanced manufacturing.\r\n \r\nSuspension of trade with Israel would not only put those jobs and businesses at risk, but would also damage the strong links between UK and Israeli scientists, who regularly collaborate on research and development projects, resulting in new technologies, medicines, industrial processes, and other products and services.\r\n\r\nWe fully understand the strength of feeling on this issue among the petitioners, but if their ultimate goal is to see an end to the war and humanitarian suffering in Gaza, then we hope they will in turn accept our sincerely held view that the quickest, most effective way to pursue that goal is not through trade sanctions, but through the current peace initiative, based on the months of groundwork that the UK has done alongside our international partners to give that initiative the best chance of success. \r\n\r\nForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office","created_at":"2025-10-16T09:40:33.434Z","updated_at":"2025-10-16T09:41:44.328Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738421,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738421.json"},"attributes":{"action":"The UK Government should not unilaterally recognise a Palestinian State","background":"We urge the UK not to unilaterally recognise a Palestinian state before a negotiated peace. We believe the UK should support direct talks, conditioned on Hamas releasing hostages, disarming, & leaving Gaza; & the PA ending ‘Pay to Slay’, removing extremist content from schools, & recognising Israel.","additional_details":"We believe unilateral recognition rewards terrorism, betrays the hostages including those with UK ties, and damages peace efforts. We consider that lasting peace must come through direct negotiation, not unilaterally imposed statehood. We think the UK must insist on essential reforms before talks can proceed: Hamas disarmament, PA ending payments to convicted terrorists, and removing violent and racist incitement from the school curriculum. The Palestinian leadership must also recognise Israel’s right to exist for talks to succeed.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":59054,"created_at":"2025-08-19T17:46:39.926Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T11:27:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-12T14:48:31.323Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-19T21:55:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-14T02:38:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-16T07:49:57.624Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":"Itai Galmudy","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-16","summary":"Our recognition of Palestinian statehood, done as part of a wider global drive for peace, is helping to deliver the opposite of the petition’s concerns, showing why it was the right decision to make.","details":"On 22 September, at the United Nations General Assembly, the Foreign Secretary formally announced the UK’s decision to recognise the State of Palestine, joining France, Canada, Australia and 150 other countries who have also recognised Palestinian statehood. Her statement to the UN can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/i-stand-before-you-today-beneath-the-emblem-of-the-united-nations-to-confirm-the-historic-decision-of-the-british-government-to-recognise-the-state\r\n\r\nThe Foreign Secretary’s statement made clear not just that there could be no role for Hamas in the future governance of Palestine, but that the process of recognition had taken place in the context of the formal repudiation of Hamas, its actions and ideology by governments across the Arab world, and the commitment of the Palestinian Authority to a significant programme of reform, ranging from their support for a demilitarised Palestine and condemnation of terrorist violence, to their pledges to end so-called prisoner payments and reform Palestinian schooling.\r\n\r\nMost important, the Foreign Secretary made clear that the UK’s decision to recognise Palestinian statehood was part of a wider international effort pursued over recent months to create the political momentum for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all remaining hostages, the unrestricted flow of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and the restoration of a meaningful process to create a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, with security for the Palestinian and Israeli peoples alike.\r\n\r\nThose discussions at the UN General Assembly were shortly followed by the announcement by the White House of a 20-point peace initiative, designed to deliver all of the goals set out above. The UK Government strongly supports this initiative, and we are urging all our international partners to maintain the momentum towards its agreement and immediate implementation by all parties. At the time of writing, and accepting that there is a vast amount of work still to do, there are positive signs of progress, particularly in relation to the release of all remaining hostages.\r\n\r\nAll the actions that the UK Government has taken, including recognising the State of Palestine in the circumstances that we did, have been done with the aim in mind of securing an end to the immediate bloodshed, an end to humanitarian suffering in Gaza, an end to the torment of the hostages and their families, and ultimately, an end to the political impasse that has trapped generation after generation of Israelis and Palestinians in a cycle of instability, insecurity and violence. \r\n\r\nWe took that decision on recognition to keep alive the only prospect for a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, achieved by two states living peacefully alongside each other, a secure Israel alongside a secure and viable Palestine, with no future role for Hamas, and no future place for violence. We stand by that decision, and we believe all countries around the world – and all peoples of goodwill – should now join in working towards that vision of a peaceful future, in the form of the US peace initiative.\r\n\r\nForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-16T07:49:57.620Z","updated_at":"2025-10-16T07:49:57.620Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"FCDO","name":"Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/foreign-commonwealth-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722730,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722730.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make the sex offender's registry publicly available to view for everyone.","background":"Make the sex offender's registry publicly available to view for everyone","additional_details":"I think everyone should be able to view if there is a high risk individual in their area.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":11666,"created_at":"2025-03-19T12:45:39.305Z","updated_at":"2025-11-02T07:46:58.622Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-22T11:26:54.128Z","closed_at":"2025-10-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-19T13:01:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-17T19:05:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-15T15:20:15.484Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-15","summary":"We are not planning to create a public sex offender registry. Tough checks are made by the police to manage registered sex offenders in the community.","details":"The police have a range of measures available to them to monitor and risk-manage convicted sex offenders and individuals without a conviction who pose a risk of harm. \r\n\r\nIndividuals convicted of or cautioned for certain sexual offences are required to comply with notification requirements set out in the Sexual Offences Act 2003. These require offenders to notify their local police station of specific details including their name(s), address(es) and all foreign travel. This must be done annually and whenever their details change. The notification requirements are an automatic consequence of a conviction or caution for an offence in Schedule 3 to the 2003 Act. Failure to comply is a criminal offence punishable by a maximum of five years’ imprisonment.\r\n\r\nIndividuals subject to these requirements are referred to as ‘registered sex offenders’ (RSOs). Whilst this system is referred to as the ‘sex offenders' register’, it is not a register, but a series of requirements imposed on RSOs.\r\n\r\nAll RSOs are managed under the statutory multi-agency public protection arrangements (MAPPA), which requires the police, prison and probation services to manage the risks posed by RSOs and other offenders. The most recent MAPPA data published by the Ministry of Justice (in October 2024) showed that on 31 March 2024, 70,052 RSOs were managed under MAPPA in the community. \r\n\r\nInformation RSOs notify to the police is stored on the ViSOR database. The police, probation and prison services use ViSOR to store and share information about serious offenders for the purpose of managing the risks they pose. ViSOR will be replaced by a new system, MAPPS, which will improve multi-agency working in the future. \r\n\r\nAs part of the MAPPA process, each offender has a risk management plan. During the formulation of that risk management plan, consideration must be given as to the disclosure of information about the offender to third parties. This includes assessing whether proactive disclosure is necessary to protect victims, potential victims, or others in the community such as an employer or a person forming a relationship with an offender.\r\n\r\nSection 327A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 places a legal duty on MAPPA authorities to consider disclosure in every case involving child sex offenders, where it is necessary and proportionate to prevent or detect crime.\r\n\r\nWhere necessary to protect individuals from serious harm, the police can disclose information about RSOs with convictions or individuals without convictions who pose a risk of sexual harm. There are specific schemes that support this process: the non-statutory Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme (Sarah’s Law) and the statutory Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme (Clare’s Law). These schemes provide a framework to help the police make disclosure decisions and enable members of the public to request information.\r\n\r\nIn addition to the notification requirements, civil orders are available to the police, on\r\napplication to the court, to manage the risk posed by registered sex offenders and those who pose a risk of harm:\r\n•\tSexual harm prevention orders can be applied to anyone convicted or cautioned for a sexual or violent offence, including where offences are committed overseas; and\r\n•\tSexual risk orders can be applied to any individual (even without a conviction) who has done an act of a sexual nature as a result of which they are considered to pose a risk of harm in the UK or abroad.\r\n \r\nBoth orders can place a range of restrictions and/or requirements on individuals depending on the nature of the case, such as limiting their internet use, preventing travel abroad or attending a drug or alcohol treatment or behaviour change programme. This can include a requirement that offenders disclose to relevant persons (for example, an intimate partner) that they are a registered sex offender.  For both civil orders, breach is a criminal offence punishable by a maximum of five years’ imprisonment.\r\n \r\nThe Crime and Policing Bill is introducing a range of legislative changes to strengthen the management of RSOs. This includes a power to publish statutory guidance for police on disclosing information to prevent sexual harm. This will place a duty on the police to have regard to any guidance – such as the Child Sex Offender Disclosure Scheme guidance – issued under this power. This will ensure such schemes are used and applied consistently across all police forces and will help increase the number of applications.\r\n\r\nThe system described above allows for targeted disclosure where necessary to manage risk and protect individuals. Making information publicly available would undermine this approach, risk exposing victims, and make it harder for offenders to be monitored by the police and other agencies.\r\n\r\nThe Government is keen to ensure systems such as disclosure schemes are as robust and useful to public safety as possible and will continue to work with agencies involved in offender management to ensure practice and legislation is in place to do so.\r\n\r\nHome Office\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-15T15:20:15.481Z","updated_at":"2025-10-15T15:20:47.679Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729235,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729235.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop HMRC implementing making tax digital and enforcing quarterly submissions","background":"HMRC is pushing ahead with Making Tax Digital: a scheme that requires all business to maintain digital accounts. Currently many small businesses use paper accounting records or spreadsheets. Small businesses may lack the skills, time and funding to maintain digital accounts.","additional_details":"It is taxing enough for many of us to submit a yearly tax return to HMRC. But now we think this new implementation of making tax digital, using new software and quarterly submissions is taking things just too far.  Please stop making tax digital which is due to be started in April 2026. We think paying tax is hard enough but this is going to just add insult to injury.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":20086,"created_at":"2025-06-03T10:14:02.295Z","updated_at":"2026-01-03T22:49:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-02T07:58:59.506Z","closed_at":"2026-01-02T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-03T11:21:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-01T19:24:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-15T07:43:00.156Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-15","summary":"Making Tax Digital will help businesses stay on top of their affairs, boost productivity and ensure more of the right tax is paid. The Government will support users and has no plans to delay.","details":"Making Tax Digital delivers value for money by increasing the amount of tax collected. This ensures that more money can go to funding vital public services, like the NHS, and supporting growth across the UK. Making Tax Digital for VAT has already been successful at reducing error and increasing tax revenues. HMRC’s published evaluation shows Making Tax Digital generated additional VAT revenue, as forecast, in the range of £185 million to £195 million in 2019 to 2020. Making Tax Digital for Income Tax  will build on this, and we expect it will result in an additional £1.95bn in tax cumulatively between its introduction and the 2029-30 financial year.\r\n \r\nThe Government is working with taxpayers, agents and software developers to ensure the introduction of Making Tax Digital for Income Tax from April 2026 is a success.\r\n\r\nMaking Tax Digital for Income Tax is a new approach that uses modern technology to helps customers stay on top of their tax affairs and avoid errors. It will build on successful introduction of Making Tax Digital for VAT which applies to over 2m VAT-registered businesses. Making Tax Digital for Income Tax requires sole traders and landlords to use software to keep digital records and send simple quarterly updates to HMRC. These quarterly updates are not tax returns. They aim to be simple and quick to complete, with software automatically drawing data from digital records.\r\n\r\nFrom 6 April 2026, sole traders and landlords with a qualifying income over £50,000 must use it, where their qualifying income is their total annual income before the deduction of expenses or tax from self-employment and property. HMRC are introducing Making Tax Digital for Income Tax in phases, meaning that smaller businesses with qualifying income above £30,000 will be required to use the service from April 2027, with those above £20,000 brought in in April 2028.\r\n\r\nThe Government understands this is a big change for many taxpayers and agents, and it is committed to supporting them through the transition. It has worked with the software industry to ensure there is free and low-cost software available to support smaller and simpler businesses.  HMRC is also taking comprehensive steps to raise awareness by writing to affected taxpayers and agents, engaging widely with industry and tax bodies and launching a marketing campaign through social media and radio. \r\n\r\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2025-10-15T07:43:00.153Z","updated_at":"2025-10-15T07:43:00.153Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":716399,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/716399.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Stop benefits and free healthcare for immigrants who have not worked in the UK","background":"I urge the Government to prevent all immigrants who have not worked and paid UK tax & national insurance in the UK for a minimum of 5 years, from accessing benefits and free healthcare.","additional_details":"I believe this will benefit the U.K. massively in economic terms. It could help stop people living off the state, which I believe is out of control, unsustainable and is the intention of many people who come to the UK.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":12936,"created_at":"2025-02-01T08:20:35.780Z","updated_at":"2025-11-02T07:46:36.442Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-03-24T16:59:34.917Z","closed_at":"2025-09-24T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-02T11:44:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-17T16:13:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-13T08:39:50.122Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-13","summary":"Strict controls already exist to meet the petition demands, through the No Recourse to Public Funds rule and Immigration Health Surcharge, and the Immigration White Paper will strengthen them further.","details":"It may be useful to begin this response by explaining to the petitioners the controls that are already in place to prevent individuals who do not have the legal right to settle in the UK from accessing benefits and healthcare that are designed only to be available for those residents who do.\r\n\r\nThe No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) rule is a standard condition applied to most categories of temporary immigration permission, which prevents those who are subject to immigration control from accessing certain services or benefits. Those who are in the UK without lawful status are also prevented from accessing public funds.\r\n \r\nPublic funds in this context includes most welfare benefits, including Universal Credit, as well as housing support. For a full list of public funds, see here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/public-funds--2/public-funds.\r\n\r\nThe NRPF controls are especially important for migrants who have come to the UK on visas to work or to study. These migrants are generally expected to maintain and support themselves and their families without posing a burden on the UK’s welfare system. Most migrants with NRPF must meet a minimum income threshold, demonstrating that they can support themselves and their dependants financially. For this reason, the majority of temporary migrants are granted leave under the condition that they cannot access public funds.\r\n \r\nThese restrictions are an important plank of immigration policy designed to ensure that controlled immigration brings real economic benefits to the UK, that public funds are protected for the residents of the UK, and that excessive demands are not made upon the UK’s finite resources.\r\n\r\nThe Immigration Health Surcharge (IHS) ensures that the same principle applies to temporary migrants when it comes to the NHS. The IHS is paid by those individuals as part of their visa applications, at a current rate of up to £1,035 per person annually, based on the Department for Health and Social Care’s analysis of the average annual cost to the NHS of treating IHS payers.\r\n\r\nThis ensures that – instead of benefiting from free healthcare while they are in the UK – those temporary migrants are instead obliged to pay up front for any costs they may incur. Since its inception in 2015 the IHS has generated over £6.9 billion for the NHS, which is shared between the health administrations in England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland.\r\n\r\nAs set out above, therefore, when it comes to both the welfare and healthcare systems, there are strict rules to prevent even those individuals who have come to the UK to work from having access to those benefits while they are here on a temporary basis.\r\n\r\nThe only point at which an individual from overseas can gain access to those benefits is when they are granted permission to settle in the UK, otherwise known as indefinite leave to remain. In the Government’s Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May, the former Home Secretary set out plans to reform the process by which individuals can earn settled status. This stated:\r\n\r\n“It has been a long-standing principle that settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. Under the current system settlement is primarily qualified for on the basis of length of time spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\r\n\r\n“These criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in our country and they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\r\n \r\n“We will therefore reform the current rules around settlement through an expansion of the principle behind the Points-Based System, that individuals should earn their right to privileged immigration status in the UK through the long- term contribution they bring to our country.”\r\n\r\nAs part of these reforms, the former Home Secretary announced that we would increase the standard qualifying period for settlement from five years to ten years, and would set out the full detail of these proposed changes later this year. On 29 September, the Home Secretary announced a proposed new contribution-based settlement model to reduce net migration, boost integration and reduce pressure on public services; with the right to settlement being earned over a standard period of ten years.\r\n \r\nMore information can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-contribution-based-settlement-model-to-reduce-net-migration.\r\n \r\nWe hope that the petitioners will welcome these changes, as a way of strengthening the existing controls on access to the UK’s welfare and healthcare systems, and we look forward to them engaging with the proposed reforms when they are set out for consultation in the coming months.\r\n\r\nHome Office\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-13T08:39:50.120Z","updated_at":"2025-10-13T08:43:25.548Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727514,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727514.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the school week to four days a week","background":"We urge the Government to require all schools to reduce the school week to four instead of five days by making each school day one hour longer whilst requiring the school week to be four instead of five days.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":126014,"created_at":"2025-05-14T09:44:32.926Z","updated_at":"2026-01-06T13:52:10.682Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T10:13:43.683Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-14T10:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-18T06:28:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.659Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-20T13:29:30.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-05","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-06T10:12:33.567Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-10","summary":"The government has no plans to reduce the school week to four days. Regular attendance at school is vital for children’s education, well-being and long-term development as well as parental employment.","details":"The government has no plans to require schools to reduce the length of the school week from five days to four by adding an additional hour to each of the four days.\r\n\r\nTo ensure children across the country have sufficient time in school to enable them to achieve and thrive, the Government has set a minimum expectation that all state-funded, mainstream schools will deliver a minimum school week of 32 hours and 30 minutes. Consistency in the length of the school week is essential for providing equal learning opportunities that will enable children and young people to achieve and thrive. While most state funded schools already meet this requirement, schools that don’t are encouraged to move towards doing so as soon as possible. \r\n\r\nReducing the school week to four days whilst still delivering the minimum expectation would mean a minimum school day of over 8 hours. Schools would have to deliver an additional 1 hour and 38 minutes per day across the four days to meet the weekly minimum requirement. \r\n\r\nReducing the school week would also have a damaging impact on parents, many of whom would need to make additional arrangements for childcare, reduce their working hours or potentially leave the workforce altogether. This would in turn put families under financial strain and have a damaging effect on the country’s economy.\r\n\r\nBeing in school, enjoying a broad and balanced education and achieving academically are key protective factors that help to promote mental health and well-being. Considering the wider benefits of time in school, the government therefore has no plans to reduce the school week from five days to four.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.656Z","updated_at":"2025-10-13T12:40:29.512Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-05","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-01-05/debates/19F9E3C3-4B57-4221-BC1F-38C236441355/LengthOfTheSchoolWeek","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/JJDrsAcGzHY","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07148/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":711892,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/711892.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Provide funding to preserve and protect cemeteries around the UK.","background":"We feel that much more funding for cemeteries is needed to care, maintain, protect and preserve them now and in the years ahead.","additional_details":"We think this is important as babies, children, adults and those in the Armed Forces are resting in cemeteries, their forever home. We feel that these places are where we honour, remember and pay our respects to those we love and cherish with all our hearts. We feel that we all live on through our precious loved one's who have gone before us and the legacies left behind by millions of these people.\r\n \r\nWe believe that cemeteries are not sufficiently funded when they should be beautiful open green spaces we are all proud of.   \r\n   ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":10857,"created_at":"2025-01-01T14:02:06.980Z","updated_at":"2025-11-02T07:47:27.769Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-02-21T16:25:41.740Z","closed_at":"2025-08-21T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-01-02T09:55:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-19T17:41:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-09T15:54:07.241Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-09","summary":"Local authority cemeteries are managed by councils, who set budgets and make service decisions locally. Privately owned cemeteries operate independently and are maintained by their respective owners.","details":"The government does not have day-to-day operational responsibility for burial grounds. However, we recognise the importance of cemeteries as places of remembrance, heritage, and community significance. Their preservation and upkeep matter deeply to families and communities across the UK.\r\n\r\nResponsibility for the maintenance and funding of cemeteries depends on their ownership. Local authority cemeteries are managed by individual councils, who are responsible for setting their own budgets and making decisions about local services in line with community priorities. The majority of funding in the Local Government Finance Settlement is unringfenced recognising that local leaders are best placed to identify local priorities. \r\n\r\nPrivately owned cemeteries, including those operated by religious organisations, charities, or private businesses, are independently managed and do not receive government funding. Their maintenance and preservation are the responsibility of their owners.\r\n\r\nThe government has issued Guidance for Burial Gound Managers (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7e0743ed915d74e6223a35/burial-ground-managers.pdf) which aims to support good practice across the sector. It is designed to ensure that cemetery managers are familiar with the legal framework in which they operate and to encourage consistent standards of care.\r\n\r\nThe guidance sets out expectations around maintenance, including:\r\n\r\n•\tA general duty to keep burial grounds in good order and repair, including paths, boundaries, and communal areas.\r\n•\tThe need for sensitive and proportionate ground maintenance, balancing practical upkeep with respect for the bereaved and the cultural or environmental character of the site.\r\n•\tResponsibilities for the maintenance of graves and memorials, including safety inspections and appropriate action where memorials pose a risk.\r\n•\tConsiderations around environmental and heritage preservation, such as biodiversity, landscape management, and the protection of historically significant features.\r\n\r\nThe guidance applies to all burial ground managers, regardless of ownership type, and aims to promote high standards across the sector. \r\n\r\nThe government is also considering longer-term reforms to burial law through the Law Commission’s “Burial, Cremation and New Funerary Methods” project. As part of this, the Commission is considering introducing a general duty for burial ground operators to maintain sites in good order, potentially supported by a statutory code of practice and periodic management plans to encourage consistent standards and enable enforcement where necessary. \r\n\r\nThe Law Commission anticipates publishing its report on the burial and cremation part of this project at the end of 2025 and the government looks forward to considering this. \r\n\r\nDepartment for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs","created_at":"2025-10-09T15:54:07.233Z","updated_at":"2025-10-09T15:54:07.233Z"},"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":729231,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729231.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Deport all illegal migrants in the United Kingdom","background":"We think an effective strategy is needed to identify, detain and deport all individuals residing the UK illegally.","additional_details":"We think the cost to the taxpayer is crippling and needs to be addressed especially as more than 350,000 people in England are currently homeless. We think the UK is already so over-populated that the current government advocates building on low quality green belt land, or 'grey belt' land.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":16427,"created_at":"2025-06-03T09:25:31.416Z","updated_at":"2026-01-04T22:45:40.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-03T08:54:50.992Z","closed_at":"2026-01-03T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-03T13:25:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-17T16:09:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-08T07:47:22.471Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-07","summary":"The Government agrees that maximising the return of those unlawfully in the UK is essential to strengthening border security and restoring order to the asylum and immigration system.","details":"The Prime Minister has repeatedly stated his commitment to reducing illegal immigration by dismantling the criminal gangs behind the trafficking of migrants across the channel and increasing the return of people with no right to be in this country. The Home Secretary has been clear on her priority to protect the UK border and explore all options to restore order to the immigration system.\r\n\r\nThe Government is bringing the full force of our laws to bear on these issues. Those found to have no right to be in the UK, including foreign criminals, should be returned as quickly as possible, through effective enforcement action where they refuse to depart voluntarily. \r\n\r\nA systematic programme of work is focusing on delivering a major surge in immigration enforcement and returns activity. Immigration Enforcement staff are dedicated to making arrests, driving through decisions on individual cases, detaining people where necessary and getting them onto returns flights.\r\nIn its first year in office, the Government returned over 35,000 failed asylum seekers, foreign criminals and other immigration offenders with no right to be in the UK, an increase of 13% on the previous year. This has included 66 charter flights, including four of the biggest returns flights in the UK's history, carrying more than 850 people.\r\n\r\nThere are significant and complex challenges that could impact on a person’s return as they move through the immigration system, such as new applications to regularise their stay, progressing through the appeals process or other litigation barriers, as well as changes in country situations. On 1 September, the then Home Secretary set out in Parliament a range of further measures for tackling abuses of the system that seek to prevent removal: \r\n\r\nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/strengthening-border-security-and-reforms-to-the-asylum-system\r\n\r\nStrengthening international cooperation is also key to enabling quick and safe returns. Under the new treaty agreed with France in August - which allows the UK to directly return to France those who arrive in the UK on small boats - individuals can be detained immediately upon arrival at Dover, pending return. The first returns under this agreement began on 18 September 2025.\r\n\r\nThe Home Secretary agreed with Five Eyes partners to work even more closely to return those with no right to be in our countries by coordinating on measures like limiting visas for countries who do not cooperate.\r\nThe Government is increasing detention capacity to support increased enforced returns, with work to establish two new immigration removal centres at Campsfield and Haslar progressing at pace. \r\n\r\nCurrently, there is a significant backlog in the First Tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber, with an average wait time of 54 weeks. Whilst we have surged the average number of initial decisions made by 31,000 per quarter, delays in determining immigration and asylum appeals increase the pressure in the asylum accommodation system. That is why the Government announced plans to establish a new independent appeals body, which will be fully independent of government and staffed by professionally trained adjudicators, with safeguards to ensure high standards. It will be able to surge capacity as needed and to accelerate and prioritise cases, alongside new procedures to tackle repeat applications and unnecessary delays.\r\n\r\nThe Government has made a £1 billion investment in homelessness and rough sleeping services this year (2025/26), £233 million up on the year before, to prevent rises in the number of families in temporary accommodation and help to prevent rough sleeping. \r\n\r\nThe Spending Review protects this record level of investment to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping for the next three years and provides £100 million to fund increased homelessness prevention activity by local authorities. \r\n\r\nThe Government is committed to preserving Green Belts which have served England's towns and cities well over many decades. On 27 February 2025, it published updated Green Belt guidance, to ensure that a consistent approach is taken to the identification of grey belt land. More details can be found here: \r\n\r\nhttps://www.gov.uk/guidance/green-belt.\r\n\r\nThe Government is taking forward an effective strategy for identifying and returning those with no right to be in this country. Further reforms will follow, but across Government, and led by the Home Office and Immigration Enforcement in particular, there will be a relentless focus on tackling the harm those here unlawfully cause to our economy and our society, building on progress so far and continuing to fix our broken system.\r\n\r\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-10-08T07:47:22.468Z","updated_at":"2025-10-08T07:47:59.607Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":734441,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/734441.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Ban payment processors stopping services based on objections to legal content","background":"Government should legislate that payment processing companies may not place stipulations on use of their services regarding sales of otherwise legal content and, if they do so, must face legal penalties and must remunerate platforms and individuals for lost income until service is restored.","additional_details":"There are reports that payment processing companies have recently placed pressure on companies that rely on their services, pressuring them to remove legitimate content.\r\n \r\nBecause there are a small number of major payment processing companies, we believe this poses an unacceptable threat to small businesses and private individuals, and undermines democratic free speech through censorship from unaccountable companies.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":13556,"created_at":"2025-07-24T19:11:42.557Z","updated_at":"2026-02-27T00:00:19.619Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-26T09:33:40.096Z","closed_at":"2026-02-26T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-24T20:27:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-21T19:22:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-06T16:06:13.888Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-06","summary":"Payment processors are able to choose who they process payments for, subject to any relevant requirements. The Government has no plans to intervene in those commercial decisions.","details":"The Government recognises the important role payments plays in supporting a resilient, diverse and growing economy. The Government is committed to ensuring that the UK’s payment system works for all, allowing businesses and customers to transact with confidence.\r\n\r\nThe Government recognises that it is important for businesses to have greater choice in the forms of payment that they can accept. The National Payments Vision, published in November 2024, set out the Government’s ambition for a world-leading payments ecosystem, where consumers and businesses have a choice of payment methods to meet their needs. A key part of this ambition is the continued development of Open Banking, which enables consumers to make purchases using a wider range of payment methods, including account-to-account payments, thereby increasing competition in the payments sector. HM Treasury is working closely with the financial services regulators to deliver these outcomes.\r\n\r\nDecisions regarding which businesses payment processors contract with are a commercial matter, taking into account the relevant requirements on the firm. These decisions will be influenced by a variety of factors, and the Government has no plans to intervene in those commercial decisions.\r\n\r\nHM Treasury","created_at":"2025-10-06T16:06:13.886Z","updated_at":"2025-10-06T16:11:03.513Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738881,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738881.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Invest in brain cancer and give rights – turn terminal into treatable","background":"Brain cancer is the biggest cancer killer of children and adults under 40, 87% with a high-grade brain tumour diagnosis die within 5 yrs, and yet it gets just 1% of the national spend on cancer.","additional_details":"We call on the government to increase research funding and legally enshrine the right to try: genome sequencing, trials, immunotherapy, repurposed drugs and vaccines.\r\n1. Increase brain cancer funding to speed up discoveries and trials.\r\n2. Funding so every patient can access whole genome sequencing with personalised treatment.\r\n3. Enshrine the Right to Try innovative treatments.\r\n\r\nTreatments haven’t changed in decades. Increase funding and give patients a fighting chance.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109063,"created_at":"2025-08-23T10:25:22.364Z","updated_at":"2026-03-09T20:17:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-08T12:10:38.559Z","closed_at":"2026-03-08T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-23T16:25:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-09T20:39:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-03T10:55:37.025Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-26T22:45:50.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-03","summary":"Every brain cancer diagnosis has life-changing impact on patients and their families. Research is vital to ensure people can get the most effective cutting-edge treatments and highest quality care.","details":"Between 2018/19 and 2023/24, the Department of Health and Social Care, via the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) directly invested £11.8 million in research projects and programmes focused on brain tumours. NIHR’s wider investments in research infrastructure are estimated to be £37.5 million, supporting the delivery of 261 brain tumour research studies and enabling over 11,400 people to participate in potentially life-changing brain tumour research.\r\n\r\nHowever, we understand that more needs to be done to boost research into brain tumours. That is why we are working closely with the patient and researcher communities to stimulate high-quality research applications through:\r\n\r\n(i) establishing a national Brain Tumour Research Consortium to bring together researchers from different disciplines to drive scientific advancements in how to prevent, detect, manage and treat brain tumours\r\n\r\n(ii) a dedicated funding call for research into wraparound care and rehabilitation for people living with brain tumours\r\n\r\n(iii) a partnership with the Tessa Jowell Brain Cancer Mission to fund the next generation of researchers through the Allied Health Professionals Brain Tumour Research Fellowship programme.\r\n\r\nIn terms of access to Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS), in November 2020, the NHS became the first national health system in the world to offer WGS as part of routine care. All paediatric, teenage and adult patients with central nervous system/brain tumours are eligible for WGS as represented in the National Genomic Test Directory, which provides guidance on which patients may benefit from genomic testing, alongside the genomic targets to be tested and appropriate technology that should be used.\r\n\r\nGenomic testing in the NHS in England is provided through the NHS Genomic Medicine Service (NHS GMS). As outlined in the 10 Year Health Plan, the NHS GMS will work with industry, academia and other partners to generate evidence and models of adoption for genomic innovations in specific priority areas, such as cancer. This will inform commissioning decisions, accelerate adoption and ensure equity of access to genomic testing across England. Additionally, the NHS GMS will roll out a Unified Genomic Record to integrate patient genomic data with relevant clinical and diagnostic data, shorten genomic testing turnaround times, and work with industry to align testing with clinical trials targets and precision medicine access.\r\n\r\nRegarding new and personalised treatments, the government is committed to securing patient access to effective and innovative new medicines, including for brain tumours. There are established routes to support timely access for NHS patients to safe and clinically- and cost-effective new medicines and there are no plans to introduce a new Right to Try initiative for new treatments. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) evaluates all new medicines and makes recommendations for the NHS on whether they should be routinely funded by the NHS. NICE aims wherever possible to issue guidance on new medicines close to the point of licensing and our Life Sciences Sector Plan published in July sets out the measures we are taking to streamline decision making to accelerate patient access to new medicines by three to six months. The NHS in England is required to fund medicines recommended by NICE, and NHS England funds cancer medicines from the point of positive draft NICE guidance, accelerating patient access by around five months on average.\r\n\r\nAdditionally, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Early Access to Medicines Scheme (EAMS) is one of the UK’s offerings of Early Access Programmes, where companies have a framework for providing promising treatments in development as unlicensed medicines to patients. The EAMS is designed to give patients with life-threatening or seriously debilitating conditions access to medicinal products that may be used for preventing, diagnosing or treating those conditions, but which are either not yet authorised or not authorised for that use. If there is a medicine in development that incorporates certain diagnostic techniques, they may be eligible for the scheme.\r\n\r\nIn terms of future publications, the National Cancer Plan, due to be published later this year, will have patients at its heart and will cover the entirety of the cancer pathway, from referral and diagnosis to treatment and aftercare. It will seek to improve every aspect of cancer care, to improve the experience and outcomes for people with cancer. Our goal is to reduce the number of lives lost to cancer over the next ten years, including for brain cancer.\r\n\r\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-10-03T10:55:37.022Z","updated_at":"2025-10-03T10:55:37.022Z"},"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":730194,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730194.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not introduce Digital ID cards","background":"We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.","additional_details":"We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We oppose the creation of any national ID system. \r\n \r\nID cards were scrapped in 2010, in our view for good reason.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2984193,"created_at":"2025-06-12T15:26:34.449Z","updated_at":"2026-01-19T14:14:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-09T15:28:15.595Z","closed_at":"2026-01-09T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T16:12:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-03T12:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.956Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-22T12:28:20.000Z","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-09T13:28:36.897Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-02","summary":"We will introduce a digital ID within this Parliament to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies. We will consult on details soon. ","details":"The Government has announced plans to introduce a digital ID system which is fit for the needs of modern Britain. We are committed to making people’s everyday lives easier and more secure, to putting more control in their hands (including over their own data), and to driving growth through harnessing digital technology. We also want to learn from countries which have digitised government services for the benefit of their citizens, in line with our manifesto commitment to modernise government.\r\n\r\nCurrently, when UK citizens and residents use public services, start a new job, or, for example, buy alcohol, they often need to present an assortment of physical documents to prove who they are or things about themselves. This is both bureaucratic for the individual and creates space for abuse and fraud. This includes known issues with illegal working and modern slavery, while the fragmented approach and multiple systems across Government make it difficult for people to access vital services. Further, there are too many people who are excluded, like the 1 in 10 UK adults who don’t have a physical photo ID, so can struggle to prove who they are and access the products and services they are entitled to.\r\n \r\nTo tackle these interlinked issues, we will introduce a new national digital ID. This is not a card but a new digital identity that will be available for free to all UK citizens and legal residents aged 16 and over (although we will consider through consultation if this should be age 13 and over). Over time, people will be able to use it to seamlessly access a range of public and private sector services, with the aim of making our everyday lives easier and more secure. It will not be compulsory to obtain a digital ID but it will be mandatory for some applications.\r\n\r\nFor example, the new digital ID will build on GOV.UK One Login and the GOV.UK Wallet to drive the transformation of public services. Over time, this system will allow people to access government services – such as benefits or tax records – without needing to remember multiple logins or provide physical documents. It will significantly streamline interactions with the state, saving time and reducing frustrating paperwork, while also helping to create opportunities for more joined up government services. International examples show how beneficial this can be. For instance, Estonia’s system reportedly saves each citizen hours every month by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, and the move to becoming a digital society has saved taxpayer money.\r\n  \r\nBy the end of this Parliament, employers will have to check the new digital ID when conducting a ‘right to work’ check. This will help combat criminal gangs who promise access to the UK labour market in order to profit from dangerous and illegal channel crossings. It will create a fairer system between UK citizens and legal residents, crack down on forged documents, and streamline the process for employers, driving up compliance. Further, it will create business information showing where employers are conducting checks, so driving more targeted action against non-compliant employers.\r\n \r\nFor clarity, it will not be a criminal offence to not hold a digital ID and police will not be able to demand to see a digital ID as part of a “stop and search.”\r\n \r\nPrivacy and security will also be central to the digital ID programme. We will follow data protection law and best practice in creating a system which people can rightly put their trust in. People in the UK already know and trust digital credentials held in their phone wallets to use in their everyday lives, from paying for things to storing boarding passes. The new system will be built on similar technology and be your boarding pass to government. Digitally checkable digital credentials are more secure than physical documents which can be lost, copied or forged, and often mean sharing more information than just what is necessary for a given transaction.\r\nThe new system will be designed in accordance with the highest security standards to protect against a comprehensive range of threats, including cyber-attacks.\r\n  \r\nWe will launch a public consultation in the coming weeks and work closely with employers, trade unions, civil society groups and other stakeholders, to co-design the scheme and ensure it is as secure and inclusive as possible. Following consultation, we will seek to bring forward legislation to underpin this system.\r\n\r\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.953Z","updated_at":"2025-10-02T15:29:00.740Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-08/debates/9E01F17C-557A-4D02-8A93-B573721B8B20/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/dCGWpaAfJIw","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10369/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728017,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728017.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Use Proportional Representation at the next General Election","background":"Change the voting system to Proportional Representation instead of First Past the Post. We think this would eradicate disillusionment and encourage voter participation as people could start to believe that their votes actually matter.","additional_details":"We think that First Past The Post only works when there are only two parties involved. We live in a more diverse society than ever. We think that if we want our politicians to truly reflect our population then we need Proportional Representation.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":47976,"created_at":"2025-05-19T21:13:50.619Z","updated_at":"2026-01-13T10:34:10.095Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-13T13:57:56.555Z","closed_at":"2025-12-13T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-26T13:30:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-11T15:06:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-01T07:42:52.481Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-01","summary":"The Government has no plans to change the voting system for UK Parliamentary Elections.   ","details":"There are 650 Members of Parliament (MPs) in the UK Parliament, each of whom represent a constituency.  Each MP is elected using a ‘First Past the Post’ system whereby electors vote once for a candidate in their constituency.  The candidate with the most votes is elected as the MP for the constituency.  This provides a robust and secure way of electing representatives that is well understood by voters.     \r\n\r\nWhile not perfect, the Government believes this to be the most appropriate voting method for UK Parliamentary General Elections.  MPs representing a range of views and parties are elected to the Parliament, supporting a range of views to be put forward and debated.  At the same time, the ‘First Past the Post’ system also ensures a clear link between MPs and their constituents, thereby ensuring strong and clear local accountability between elected representatives and their constituents.  \r\n\r\nThe Government is committed to restoring trust in our democracy. In July 2025, the published policy paper, Restoring Trust in Our Democracy: Our strategy for modern and secure elections, set out our plans to simplify, protect and promote our democracy. \r\n\r\nThrough measures such as moving towards an increasingly automated electoral registration system and reforming voter identification we intend to remove barriers to democratic participation that we know individuals face so citizens can be encouraged to play their part in shaping our democratic future with confidence. \r\n\r\nHowever, we recognise that improving processes, such as registration and voter ID, is only part of the solution. Research(https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/research-reports-and-data/public-attitudes/attitudes-voter-registration-research-report) tells us that electors’ attitudes and motivation are arguably more important than procedural issues in determining whether they participate in the democratic process.  That is why the Government is listening to those already leading the way.  Across the UK, individuals and organisations are finding innovative ways to reduce and remove obstacles to democratic participation. We are learning from their successes and building on initiatives that are already making a difference. This work will help empower citizens to be active participants in our democracy. \r\n\r\nTo stay informed about the latest developments in electoral policy and practice, we recommend visiting www.electoralcommission.org.uk.\r\n\r\nMinistry of Housing, Communities & Local Government\r\n","created_at":"2025-10-01T07:42:52.478Z","updated_at":"2025-10-01T07:45:32.031Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":730568,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730568.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Set out a pro-innovation strategy for blockchain and stablecoins","background":"Publish a strategy for blockchain & stablecoins. We want this to:\r\n1. Drive a pro-innovation stablecoin & tokenisation regulatory regime e.g. support interest bearing stablecoins & preserve role as wholesale settlement asset\r\n2. Explore Govt uses for blockchain\r\n3. Appoint a blockchain & crypto czar","additional_details":"For centuries London was the centre of global trade and finance. We consider that the future is digital where equities, bonds and real world assets exist as tokens - tradeable 24/7, instantly, globally.\r\n \r\nWe consider stablecoins to be the basis of a tokenised economy; the US has ruled out CBDCs and is leaning into stablecoins. The UK is at a crossroads and we believe it will fall behind without a strategy. This is a question of national interest to preserve the competitiveness of the City and sterling’s global standing.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":84278,"created_at":"2025-06-16T19:41:55.412Z","updated_at":"2026-03-04T22:33:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-03T12:24:42.430Z","closed_at":"2026-03-03T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-16T20:13:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-12T17:38:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-09-29T13:18:20.264Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":null,"scheduled_debate_date":null,"debate_outcome_at":null,"creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-09-29","summary":"The government published its Wholesale Digital Markets Strategy in July and will bring forward legislation for a financial services regulatory regime for cryptoassets this year. ","details":"The government recognises the transformative potential for digital assets and blockchain technologies to drive economic growth in the UK and increase efficiencies across financial markets. We are committed to making the UK a world leading destination for digital assets.\r\n   \r\nAs part of this the government is bringing forward legislation for a comprehensive  financial services regulatory framework for cryptoassets by the end of this year. In April, the government published draft legislation for the core of the future regime, which includes provisions to support the development of UK GBP-backed stablecoin and facilitate effective market access for overseas-issued stablecoin.\r\n  \r\nThe government is actively exploring the use of new blockchain technologies, and published a Wholesale Financial Markets Digital Strategy in July that sets out its approach to digitalising markets. The government has committed to:\r\n\r\n1. Enabling the sector to test, scale and roll out solutions that tokenise financial assets and support the digitalisation of post trade processes.\r\n2. Providing a regulatory and legislative framework that allows new digital solutions to be taken forward, and quickly putting in place permanent changes.\r\n3. Ensuring there is a cross-sectoral approach to DLT adoption in wholesale financial markets, where the sector is able to identify the best DLT use cases and build cross-market coalitions to take forward live activity.\r\n\r\nThe government plans to appoint Digital Markets Champion, who will provide leadership for the sector on wholesale market digitalisation and join up work in the UK sector with other jurisdictions. Further updates will be announced in due course.\r\n\r\nHM Treasury\r\n","created_at":"2025-09-29T13:18:20.262Z","updated_at":"2025-09-29T13:19:18.869Z"},"debate":null,"departments":[{"acronym":"HMT","name":"HM Treasury","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-treasury"}],"topics":[]}}]}