{"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=debated","first":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?state=debated","last":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=3&state=debated","next":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions.json?page=2&state=debated","prev":null},"data":[{"type":"petition","id":752673,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/752673.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Act to ensure Bills backed by MPs & public can complete all stages in Parliament","background":"We want the Government to do everything in its power to ensure that when bills are supported by MPs & the public, they have the time to complete all their stages in Parliament. We believe this is important to uphold democracy.","additional_details":"We believe the decision of MPs must be respected, especially on matters of social change, and that unelected Lords have a responsibility to scrutinise bills, not block them. With over 1,000 amendments tabled to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, most by just a handful of Lords, we are concerned that it will run out of time. MPs have voted for it and a poll has found over 70% of the public back it. While the Government is neutral, it must uphold democracy. We believe it must act so the Bill can progress.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":114619,"closing_date":"2026-08-04","created_at":"2025-11-29T11:57:32.414Z","updated_at":"2026-06-13T18:38:00.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-04T10:31:36.517Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-29T12:22:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-06T17:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-26T15:48:54.427Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-03-16T19:35:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-05-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-06-08","debate_outcome_at":"2026-06-09T09:55:45.254Z","creator_name":"Sophie Blake","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-26","summary":"Parliament is the supreme legislative authority in the UK and is responsible for making law. A Bill must be passed by both Houses of Parliament to become law.","details":"Parliamentary sovereignty is a fundamental principle of the UK’s constitutional settlement. This means that it is Parliament, not the Government, that holds the power to make or repeal any law. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was introduced to the House of Commons as a Private Member’s Bill (PMB), and on the question of assisted dying, the Government has remained neutral on the Bill throughout its parliamentary stages.\n\nThe primacy of the House of Commons, as the elected House, is an established constitutional principle, and is reflected in the provisions of the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949, which reduced the House of Lords’ power to delay legislation against the will of the Commons. \n\nThe House of Lords is independent of both the House of Commons and the Government. The Government respects the important role played by the Lords in scrutinising legislation according to the conventions and procedures of the Lords. \n\nAs the Leader of the House of Commons has said, once the House of Lords have completed their scrutiny of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, the Government will, if necessary, find time in this current session for the House of Commons to consider any amendments they propose.\n\nOffice of the Leader of the House of Commons","created_at":"2026-02-26T15:48:54.423Z","updated_at":"2026-02-26T15:48:54.423Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-06-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-06-08/debates/F026BFC6-0114-40D7-9C6F-B5E334D9224F/ProgressionOfBillsThroughParliament","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/8c94trngkB8?si=iaSsyEPzcj4pcq-U&t=260","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10863/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":730605,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730605.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Mandatory collection and publication of certain child sexual offender data","background":"Place a statutory requirement on councils, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and all other related institutions to collect, record and publish the nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion of child sexual offenders, including gang based crime.","additional_details":"To protect children and inform public policy, we believe it is essential to collect, record and publish the nationality, ethnicity, immigration status and religion of all child sexual offenders, including gang based crime. This data will allow for better understanding of offender demographics, ensure transparency, and support targeted safeguarding strategies. Without this information, critical patterns may be missed, weakening efforts to prevent abuse and protect vulnerable children.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":260974,"created_at":"2025-06-17T07:57:36.152Z","updated_at":"2026-06-08T16:03:12.622Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-16T13:00:46.177Z","closed_at":"2026-01-16T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T08:09:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T15:07:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-30T14:40:37.703Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T21:58:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-05-01","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-06-01","debate_outcome_at":"2026-06-02T12:26:55.453Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-05","summary":"The Government is already taking action to increase the collection and transparency of data on the demographic characteristics of individuals responsible for group-based child sexual exploitation.","details":"The Government is determined to protect children from the horrors of grooming gangs and other forms of sexual abuse and exploitation. In February 2025, the Prime Minister and then Home Secretary commissioned Baroness Louise Casey of Blackstock to evaluate the understanding of the scale, nature and drivers of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA), including assessing data on the ethnicity of perpetrators. Her National Audit was published on Monday 16 June, and can be found here – https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-audit-on-group-based-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse.  \n\nThe Government immediately accepted the twelve recommendations from Baroness Casey’s Audit, which included making it a requirement for the police to collect the ethnicity and nationality data of individuals suspected of being members of grooming gangs or perpetrators of other group-based child sexual exploitation (recommendation four).  \n\nIn July this year, the former Home Secretary wrote to all Chief Constables to set out the clear expectation that ethnicity data on child sexual exploitation and grooming gang suspects should be collected in every case, and to urge them to make sure they are fulfilling their obligation to collect suspect ethnicity data as part of the Government's commitment to transparency and accountability. The Home Office is closely monitoring data collection and provision from forces and continues to engage with individual forces on where improvements are required. If we do not see improvements, we will not hesitate to take further action.  \n\nIn respect of nationality data, the Ministry of Justice already includes data on the nationality of persons within the prison system in its quarterly offender management statistics, here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.  In addition, the Home Office has committed to review the data that it collects and publishes regarding the nationalities and offences committed by foreign national offenders who are subject to deportation proceedings. Further details of that review process can be found here:  \nhttps://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/statistics-on-foreign-national-offenders-and-the-immigration-system. \n\nRecommendation four of Baroness Casey’s Audit did not include the collection of data on religion and immigration status. There is no current mechanism to collect such data on religion, other than through any declaration made by the perpetrator themselves, which would weaken both the accuracy and comprehensiveness of any analysis based on that data. \n\nMore broadly, as part of implementing the Casey Audit recommendations, we will nonetheless be looking at how safeguarding agencies (including the police, local authorities, schools and health services) are using information and intelligence to disrupt and prosecute those committing these terrible crimes and ensure victims and survivors are protected. \n\nWe will also continually seek to deepen our understanding of the drivers behind child grooming gangs and other group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse and ensure that as many as possible of the perpetrators responsible for these heinous crimes – whether non-recent or contemporary – are investigated and brought to justice. \n\nHome Office\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730605)","created_at":"2025-07-30T14:40:37.701Z","updated_at":"2025-12-16T17:38:50.218Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-06-01","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-06-01/debates/15CB352A-7E26-4649-B6E8-CACCCFAFF64D/ChildSexualOffenderData","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaL6n2erq88","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10851/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":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":"closed","signature_count":121854,"created_at":"2025-08-07T21:10:12.188Z","updated_at":"2026-05-12T16:32:55.323Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-10-31T10:22:59.264Z","closed_at":"2026-04-30T22:59:59.999Z","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","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-04-27","debate_outcome_at":"2026-04-29T09:09:44.258Z","creator_name":null,"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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation & Technology","created_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z","updated_at":"2025-11-13T17:10:59.741Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-04-27","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-04-27/debates/E58B5F78-ACDD-4354-9FD6-CBAB8F3115C3/AnimalTesting","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/VemDcod-F3E?si=WTR6QKGy_Rsl2Zny&t=253","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10644/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"SIT","name":"Department for Science, Innovation and Technology","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-science-innovation-and-technology"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":751174,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/751174.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Appoint a Maternity Commissioner to improve maternity care for mums and babies","background":"A 2024 parliamentary birth trauma inquiry recommended a Maternity Commissioner be appointed alongside a National Maternity Strategy to ensure mums and their babies were safe and looked after with professionalism and compassion.","additional_details":"As mothers affected by birth trauma, we believe the government should make this appointment to help restore confidence in maternity services which is why we are launching this petition.\r\n\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":155089,"closing_date":"2026-07-07","created_at":"2025-11-19T12:29:46.985Z","updated_at":"2026-06-13T20:49:50.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-07T18:31:24.854Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-19T13:11:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-09T18:26:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-28T12:00:40.347Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-28T11:38:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-04-20","debate_outcome_at":"2026-04-21T15:27:53.917Z","creator_name":"Louise Thompson and Theo Clarke","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-28","summary":"The Government has commissioned an independent Investigation into maternity and neonatal care, which makes recommendations this spring. There are no current plans to appoint a Maternity Commissioner.","details":"While the vast majority of births in England are safe, the Government recognises that there are failings in care, including failure to learn from mistakes and provide accountability to families. These issues, coupled with stark inequalities in maternity outcomes and experience for women and babies from ethnic backgrounds and those living in more deprived areas, demonstrate that there are deep-rooted issues across maternity and neonatal services.\n\nTo help the Government understand the systemic issues behind why so many women, babies and families experience unacceptable care, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care appointed Baroness Amos to lead a rapid, independent investigation into NHS maternity and neonatal services in June 2025. The investigation is looking into the maternity and neonatal system nationally and will bring together the findings of past reviews into one clear national set of recommendations.\n\nThe investigation will aim to understand the lived experiences of women, babies and families in England at all stages of the maternity and neonatal care pathway, which includes postnatal care and psychological support. It will also aim to understand the experiences of staff and healthcare professionals delivering care at all stages of the pathway, and how they can best be supported in providing high-quality, safe and compassionate care. To support this work, the investigation launched a Call for Evidence on 20 January 2026, which has been developed following extensive insight and feedback from families. This is a survey that is open for eight weeks, until 17 March 2026.\n\nIn December 2025, Baroness Amos published reflections on what she has heard so far as part of the investigation, following engagement with women and families. Her reflections highlighted ongoing issues experienced by women and families during their care, including a lack of communication, a lack of compassion and support when things go wrong, discrimination, and significant pressure on staff. The Secretary of State has agreed with Baroness Amos that the investigation will publish its final report and recommendations in spring 2026.\n\nGiven the investigation’s ongoing work to understand the systemic issues within maternity and neonatal services and to then make recommendations about how we should tackle this, the Government does not currently plan to appoint a Maternity Commissioner at this time.\n\nThe Government will shortly be launching a National Maternity and Neonatal Taskforce, chaired by the Secretary of State. The taskforce will take forward the recommendations of the investigation to develop a new national action plan to drive improvements across maternity and neonatal care. The taskforce will also hold the system to account for improving outcomes and experiences for women and babies.\n\nFamilies’ voices will be central to the taskforce. The Secretary of State, as Chair, will allow for direct accountability – to ensure actions are implemented and issues can be raised directly with Government. The taskforce is being set up now so that it can be fully prepared to act once the investigation reports in spring.\n\nThe Government is not waiting for the investigation to report to ensure maternity and neonatal services deliver high quality care to women and babies. Immediate action is being taken to boost accountability and safety as part of the Government’s mission to build an NHS fit for the future. This includes the publication of a maternal care bundle which sets out best practice standards to reduce rates of maternal mortality and morbidity, as well as a postnatal toolkit to improve the care and support offered to women after birth. These are in addition to other programmes to tackle discrimination and racism and avoidable brain injuries.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-01-28T12:00:40.345Z","updated_at":"2026-01-28T12:00:40.345Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-04-20","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-04-20/debates/FD803B26-6F84-45B6-8FFF-7E8E6AB29318/MaternityCommissioner","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/DcD2XNoNtss","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10447/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":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":"2026-04-17T12:59:46.293Z","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","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-04-13","debate_outcome_at":"2026-04-17T12:59:46.293Z","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. \n\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. \n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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. \n\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.\n\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.\n\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. \n\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. \n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2026-01-07T08:16:31.246Z","updated_at":"2026-01-07T08:16:31.246Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-04-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-04-13/debates/02AEEF70-640B-4605-90D6-8ED35599A399/DisclosureAndSafeguardingAt-RiskChildren","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/ZoJ8VHaOcD0","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10606/","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":732342,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732342.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce Statutory Menstrual Leave for People with Endometriosis & Adenomyosis","background":"We call on the UK Government to introduce statutory paid menstrual leave of up to 3 days per month for people with conditions such as endometriosis and adenomyosis, following the model introduced in Portugal in 2025.","additional_details":"We urge the UK Government to implement a statutory menstrual leave policy similar to the one recently passed in Portugal. \r\n\r\n• Provide up to 3 days of paid menstrual leave per month for individuals with a valid medical diagnosis\r\n• Require only a single annual medical certificate confirming the condition\r\n• Ensure full employment protections, including no loss of pay, benefits or seniority\r\n• Guarantee confidentiality and non-discrimination in the workplace","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109025,"created_at":"2025-07-03T22:25:14.191Z","updated_at":"2026-04-16T05:46:38.215Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-29T16:24:01.435Z","closed_at":"2026-01-29T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-08T21:59:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-30T18:52:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-20T15:22:35.552Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-24T19:15:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-04-13","debate_outcome_at":"2026-04-16T05:46:38.215Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-20","summary":"The Government has no plans to introduce menstrual leave for those with endometriosis or adenomyosis. We know the hardship they cause. Our employment rights reforms will help manage health at work.","details":"We recognise the difficulty and pain many women with endometriosis, adenomyosis and other menstrual or reproductive health issues face. We understand that for some women, menstrual or reproductive health issues can have a significant impact on their physical and mental wellbeing, including their participation in education and the workforce.\n\nThe Government takes women’s health issues very seriously, and we are committed to tackling them and supporting women to balance work with wider life circumstances.\n\nThe Equality Act 2010 defines disability as a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. ‘Long-term’ is described as having lasted or likely to last for at least 12 months, or likely to last for the rest of a person’s life. ‘Substantial’ is defined as more than minor or trivial. Endometriosis and adenomyosis can classify as disabilities under this definition, and individuals with a disability are protected from discrimination and their employer is required to make reasonable adjustments.\n\nReasonable adjustments can include useful changes such as phased returns to work, part-time working or flexible hours. These adjustments ensure that disabled employees are not placed at a substantial disadvantage compared to their non-disabled colleagues. Therefore, the Government has no plans to introduce statutory menstrual leave for people with endometriosis and adenomyosis.\n\nHowever, we are taking steps to support the wellbeing and positive work-life balance of all workers, including those suffering from both conditions.\n\nIf an individual’s symptoms result in them being unable to work, they may be entitled to receive Statutory Sick Pay. The landmark Employment Rights Bill boosts access to this by making Statutory Sick Pay available to all eligible employees and payable from the first day of sickness absence.\n\nThe Bill will also make flexible working the default except where not reasonably feasible. This will help workers with menstrual or reproductive health issues and their employers to agree solutions which work for both parties, ensuring they can access greater flexibility to balance their work and manage their condition.\n\nAs part of our plan to Get Britain Working, we have launched an external review to support and enable employers to promote healthy and inclusive workplaces. Sir Charlie Mayfield’s Keep Britain Working Independent Review is examining how best to support more people to stay in or return to work from periods of sickness absence, and recruit and retain more disabled people and people with health conditions. Sir Charlie Mayfield is expected to produce a final report with recommendations for government on how to support this agenda in autumn 2025.\n\nIt is unacceptable that women can wait an average of 4 to 10 years for an endometriosis diagnosis, and we have already taken action to address this.\n\nThe National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) updated their guidelines on endometriosis in November 2024. Two new treatments have been approved, and we are investing £5.6 million into research and taking action to cut gynaecology waiting lists through our Elective Reform Plan.\n\nWe know that endometriosis, adenomyosis and other menstrual or reproductive health issues can affect women in different ways. We therefore believe that the best approach is to enable individuals to have an open discussion to determine what solution best supports their needs and the circumstances of the employer.\n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-08-20T15:22:35.549Z","updated_at":"2025-08-20T15:22:35.549Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-04-13","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-04-13/debates/20959D32-00D3-4F4E-91D4-F2C3FE68CA69/StatutoryMenstrualLeave","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqbA8ok56dU","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0050/","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":756036,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/756036.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make all court and tribunal transcripts available free of charge","background":"Make all court and tribunal transcripts available for free. Currently, fees can reach thousands, creating a \"paywall\" for justice. All legal records should be public property to help ensure transparency, allow for fair appeals, and support victims. Access to the law should not depend on wealth.","additional_details":"High transcription costs can create a prohibitive paywall for justice. Private companies can charge thousands for transcriptions, which can effectively bar small-claims litigants from pursuing fair appeals or accessing their own trials. Full transcriptions of the longest trials can cost £20k. Access to the law mustn't be a luxury for the wealthy. We ask the Government to end the private-pay model and provide free digital access to all transcripts to help ensure transparency and equality.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":203536,"closing_date":"2026-08-05","created_at":"2026-01-05T15:44:31.884Z","updated_at":"2026-06-13T19:40:10.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-02-05T12:46:37.363Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-05T15:55:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-10T10:50:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:03.037Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-02-10T19:04:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-12","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-23","debate_outcome_at":"2026-05-12T12:12:08.110Z","creator_name":"Daniel ShenSmith","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-03-03","summary":"The Government is already increasing transparency in the courts, including expanding free access to Crown Court sentencing remarks.  Going further now would place even more pressure on the system.","details":"The Government is committed to strengthening transparency across the justice system and is already taking significant steps across all jurisdictions.\n\nIn the Crown Court, sentencing remarks are now published online in cases of significant public interest, and judges can also permit broadcasters to film Crown Court sentencing remarks, ensuring greater public visibility of judicial decisions. Victims of rape and serious sexual offences and bereaved families of victims of homicide, manslaughter and fatal road accidents are already entitled to free transcripts of Crown Court sentencing remarks. These can be requested here: Apply for a transcript of a judge's sentencing remarks: Form EX107H (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/apply-for-a-transcript-of-a-judges-sentencing-remarks). From Spring 2027, the Government is expanding free access to Crown Court sentencing remarks to all victims, ensuring these remarks are provided in time to support any application to the Unduly Lenient Sentencing Scheme. The Government's ongoing reform of the criminal courts will further enhance transparency by making sure all hearings in magistrates courts are recorded.\n\nIn the family court, the Government has also been working to support the judiciary to increase the number of family court judgments that are published in anonymised form, while ensuring the privacy and protection of children and families involved in proceedings.  On more targeted transparency measures, the Government is working with the judiciary to roll out new provisions relating to Transparency Orders across England and Wales, providing a clear framework for reporting where a journalist or legal blogger has attended a family court hearing. Since 29 September 2025, provisions relating to Transparency Orders have applied to all children’s cases. \n\nIn civil proceedings, litigants in England and Wales do not need to pay for the written order or judgment relating to their own case; this is sent to all parties involved, setting out the court’s reasoning for the decision, which parties can refer to if they wish to appeal that decision.\n\nIn tribunal proceedings, any judicial decision and the reasons will be provided to the parties unless there has been an order restricting that. Many of the major tribunal chambers also allow parties to proceedings to request fuller written reasons for tribunal decisions for no additional cost. \n\nThe Ministry of Justice is also working with the judiciary and His Majesty’s Courts & Tribunals Service to consider the procedural, operational and resource requirements of implementing the publishing of written reasons for decisions in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal, to improve transparency and public understanding.\n\nWhile the Government remains committed to continuing to improve transparency across the justice system, this has to be balanced against our capacity to deliver existing priorities and commitments. Making all court and tribunal transcripts available for free would create significant financial and operational pressure at a time when we are focused on rolling out free sentencing remarks for all victims, and when the wider justice system is under considerable pressure. Producing an accurate court or tribunal transcript is a resource-intensive process. Full hearing or trial transcripts are particularly expensive due to their length and the level of quality assurance required to ensure they are accurate and safeguard personal data. Ensuring compliance with reporting restrictions is also central to the release of any court transcript, including vulnerable parties are protected and sensitive details are not inadvertently released.\n\nThe Government is committed to upholding the principle of open justice, including embracing AI and exploring the opportunities it offers to produce court and tribunal transcripts more quickly and cost-effectively, while still meeting the necessary accuracy and safeguarding standards. \n\nMinistry of Justice","created_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:03.033Z","updated_at":"2026-03-03T20:54:29.587Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-23","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-23/debates/7F5059FE-61DE-4D0E-B895-9884D2533331/CourtAndTribunalTranscripts","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SoPyKyqh9o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10592/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"MoJ","name":"Ministry of Justice","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":751839,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/751839.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Cancel the clinical trial into puberty blockers & safeguard vulnerable children","background":"The government is aware of the potential irreversible impact (physical and emotional) of puberty blockers, having acknowledged an 'unacceptable safety risk’ following the Cass Review. Yet, hundreds of children are about to be given puberty blockers under a government-sanctioned trial.","additional_details":"We want this trial to be cancelled. We believe that the answer for children feeling dis-ease in their bodies (many of whom are autistic) is the passage of time and natural progression of puberty, coupled with explorative therapy. We believe that the answer is never medicalisation that can harm brain development, bone growth, sexual functioning, and lead to infertility, and that to put children on a path towards such harm is the antithesis of safeguarding.\r\nLet us not be written into history as the country that knowingly harmed vulnerable children.","committee_note":"","state":"open","signature_count":148184,"closing_date":"2026-07-08","created_at":"2025-11-24T21:03:09.099Z","updated_at":"2026-06-13T19:51:30.000Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2026-01-08T10:02:29.663Z","closed_at":null,"moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-24T21:14:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-09T12:25:40.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-02T13:19:45.268Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-12T07:34:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-03-05","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-23","debate_outcome_at":"2026-05-12T12:08:58.976Z","creator_name":"James Esses","rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-02","summary":"We are following the expert advice of the Cass Review to establish a clinical trial to determine the relative benefits and harms of puberty suppression in young people with gender incongruence.","details":"It is essential for the Government and the NHS to be guided by expert clinical advice and act with caution and care when it comes to supporting children and young people living with gender incongruence. The independent Cass Review concluded that the rationale for early puberty suppression remains unclear, and that there is not enough clinical evidence for the safe and effective routine use of puberty suppressing hormones to treat gender incongruence in under-18s. For that reason, this Government supported and extended indefinitely the ban on their use outside of research. Despite these restrictions, some young people are going to great lengths to source these drugs from unregulated providers, in the absence of scientific evidence.\n\nThe Cass Review recommended that a programme of research be established to underpin the design and delivery of NHS gender care. It specifically recommended this include a clinical trial into puberty suppression in young people with gender incongruence. This recommendation addresses the lack of evidence about the relative benefits and harms of this treatment option, particularly when provided alongside an updated model of NHS care incorporating holistic assessment and a comprehensive and tailored package of psychosocial support.\n\nThe study protocol is available on the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) website: https://fundingawards.nihr.ac.uk/award/NIHR167530\n\nThe bar for a UK clinical trial to be approved is extremely high, with the PATHWAYS trial going through rigorous rounds of scientific, clinical, ethical and regulatory review. It was approved by an independent NIHR funding committee. The final protocol was subject to rigorous approval processes through both the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency and the Health Research Authority – including review by an independent Research Ethics Committee. \n\nThe Commission on Human Medicines also considered information on the trial in detail and made recommendations that were considered and adopted by the study team. With the strongest safeguards possible, a trial of this kind is the only way to build a sufficiently high-quality evidence base to inform decisions on the future use of this treatment option for this vulnerable and distressed group of young people.\n\nProtecting and promoting the health and wellbeing of affected young people is the primary concern and there are strict eligibility criteria in place to join the PATHWAYS clinical trial. Parental consent is an integral component, with the parent needing to not only agree to their child’s involvement but also demonstrate sufficient understanding of the nature of the treatment, and what is currently known and unknown about its effects. Informed assent from the child will also be required. This will include the young person explaining in their own words to the clinician what the risks are and what they understand by those risks. \n\nThe only children to get to that stage will have already been diagnosed with gender incongruence for at least two years, will have received tailored psychosocial support, and will have been deemed clinically appropriate, within the context of the study, by both their NHS care team and the National Multi-Disciplinary Team. They will also have had to be assessed as being in stable physical and mental health.\n\nThose young people receiving (or not receiving) puberty suppressing hormones will continue to receive other elements of routine support and treatment provided as part of newly established NHS Children and Young People’s Gender Services, whose practices have been shaped by the recommendations of the Cass Review. Participants can leave the trial at any time, at which point they would receive support in their withdrawal from puberty suppression as well as ongoing psychosocial support from NHS services.\n\nHealthcare must always be led by evidence. Puberty suppression has been provided in the past with insufficient evidence, and young people have been left to go without the support and care that they need. This Government is determined to change that, and it is only through evidence-based research that we can determine the most effective way to support these young people. We believe that children and young people with gender incongruence have the same right to participate in ethically-approved research, and to receive evidence-based care, as any other group of individuals seeking the support of the NHS.\n\nFinally, it is important to reiterate that gender incongruence is an internationally recognised disorder. It is defined in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision as “a marked and persistent incongruence between an individual’s experienced gender and the assigned sex”. It does not describe girls and boys experimenting with gender norms, which for many children is a normal part of growing up. These important differences are properly understood and reflected in the new model of care being provided by the NHS.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2026-02-02T13:19:45.266Z","updated_at":"2026-02-02T13:22:52.439Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-23","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-23/debates/D6758513-7EB3-45DF-B0D9-E3C3BE3A3A97/PubertyBlockersClinicalTrial","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHa3B2PiX60&t=22s","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10534/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":737660,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/737660.json"},"attributes":{"action":"By-elections to be called automatically when MPs defect to another party","background":"When an MP decides they want to defect to another party a by-election should be automatically triggered to allow the constituents the opportunity have their democratic right to agree or not with their elected official.","additional_details":"Regardless of political views I believe you vote for both the individual candidates and their stance on issues and the more general direction and policies of the party they stand for. When an MP decides that they no longer wish to be a member of the party they stood for when you voted for them the electorate should have the opportunity to also change their mind by voting in a by-election.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":129335,"created_at":"2025-08-14T18:20:00.840Z","updated_at":"2026-03-17T10:04:59.350Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T09:00:28.450Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-19T19:49:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-17T14:35:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-02-10T08:22:10.802Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-22T23:06:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-02-06","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-16","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-17T09:39:09.032Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-02-09","summary":"There are no plans to make changes to the current constitutional arrangements, whereby voters elect individual candidates, and not the political party they represent.","details":"It is an established constitutional principle that at UK General Elections, voters cast their vote for individual candidates, and not the political party they represent.\n\nWhen a Member of Parliament (MP) decides to change their party affiliation, it is for the MP to decide whether to continue to sit in the House of Commons (as a representative of their new political party or as an independent MP) or to stand down from their seat to trigger a by-election and, if they wish, seek re-election. \n\nThere are no plans to make changes to the current arrangements.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2026-02-10T08:22:10.799Z","updated_at":"2026-02-10T08:23:06.700Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-16","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-16/debates/3369EB1A-E60E-4478-9299-BEF08EA9AA30/MemberDefectionsAutomaticBy-Elections","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/f6d6zJOGBww?si=mQxyXm69EIxawd1a&t=268","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10527/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":728677,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/728677.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Funding so all infants are offered Type 1 Diabetes Testing in routine care","background":"Fund mandatory offer of testing for Type 1 Diabetes in babies, toddlers, and young children as a routine part of medical assessments at the point of care.","additional_details":"We believe that lives could be saved by doing this. Too many children are misdiagnosed, and this can tragically lead to loss of life.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":121152,"created_at":"2025-05-27T11:22:47.229Z","updated_at":"2026-05-21T13:27:13.979Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-20T12:20:25.312Z","closed_at":"2025-12-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-27T11:31:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-04T08:16:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-17T13:51:00.718Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-12-02T23:34:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-02-06","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-09","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:15:49.601Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-17","summary":"NHS England provides diabetes care in children. Due to insufficient evidence supporting routine mandatory testing for paediatric type 1 diabetes it has no plans to introduce this at the current time.","details":"Type 1 diabetes is diagnosed with a blood test that checks blood glucose (sugar) levels. It is the responsibility of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to provide guidance and quality standards on the treatment and care of diabetes in England. NICE NG18 guideline for type 1 and 2 diabetes provides clinical guidelines for the diagnosis, treatment and care of children and young people. It states that clinicians should be aware of the signs of type 1 diabetes in children and young people, including:\n\n• hyperglycaemia\n• polyuria (passing urine more often)\n• polydipsia (excess thirst)\n• weight loss\n• excessive tiredness.\n\nNG18 also recommends that children and young people with suspected type 1 diabetes are referred immediately (on the same day) to a multidisciplinary paediatric diabetes team with the competencies needed to confirm diagnosis and provide immediate care.\n\nNHS England is not aware of there being any evidence for the feasibility and effectiveness of the mandatory offer of testing for type 1 diabetes in babies, toddlers, and young children as a routine part of medical assessments.\n\nNHS England works closely with research charity Diabetes UK which has worked to raise public and health care professional awareness of the common symptoms of type 1 diabetes, known as the 4Ts: Toilet, Thirsty, Tired and Thinner. Further information of this campaign can be found here:https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-diabetes/type-1-diabetes/symptoms\n\nEarly identification of type 1 diabetes through screening for antibodies prior to the onset of physical symptoms can provide clinical benefits, including helping to prevent diagnosis at the point of diabetic keto-acidosis (DKA). However, there is not currently a national screening programme in England.\n\nThe UK National Screening Committee advises the NHS on screening programmes and, in 2019 concluded that more research and evidence for the benefits of screening for autoimmune type 1 diabetes was required.\n\nA National Institute for Healthcare Research-funded study called ELSA (EarLy Surveillance for Autoimmune diabetes) is currently underway in England exploring the feasibility and benefits of screening in children aged 3 to 13. NHS England is working closely with researchers and leading experts in this field to ensure that emerging evidence is considered in the development of future national guidance and is reviewed ahead of further decisions on the availability of screening.\n\nDepartment of Health and Social Care","created_at":"2025-07-17T13:51:00.711Z","updated_at":"2025-07-17T13:51:00.711Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-09","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-03-09/debates/140525A1-26CC-48A6-8FB9-E2E91CB67807/Type1DiabetesInfantTesting","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llqh0F62e-Q","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0046/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DHSC","name":"Department of Health and Social Care","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-health-and-social-care"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":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":"closed","signature_count":154829,"created_at":"2025-10-17T13:47:26.613Z","updated_at":"2026-05-25T23:00:00.352Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-25T09:23:40.451Z","closed_at":"2026-05-25T22:59:59.999Z","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","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-01-30","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:19:41.848Z","creator_name":null,"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.\n\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\n\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.\n\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.\n\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.\n\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":734311,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/734311.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Give the British Public the Right to Vote No Confidence in the Government","background":"We call on Parliament to pass a law giving the British public the power to trigger a vote of no confidence in the ruling government.\r\nCurrently, only MPs can do this. We believe the public should also have the democratic right to express when they’ve lost trust in those elected to lead.","additional_details":"We voted for a party based on promises made before the general election, yet we feel none have been delivered—in fact, the opposite has happened. \r\n \r\nWe think being given this right would strengthen accountability, uphold democratic values, and ensure the government remains answerable not just to Parliament, but to the people it serves.\r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":120817,"created_at":"2025-07-23T20:55:57.496Z","updated_at":"2026-03-10T10:17:37.823Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-06T13:53:48.538Z","closed_at":"2026-02-06T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-24T06:19:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-16T20:07:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-09-04T08:08:11.512Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2026-01-01T00:30:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-01-30","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-03-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:17:37.823Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-09-04","summary":"The Government holds office by virtue of being able to command the confidence of the House of Commons, whose members are elected by the public. There are no plans to change these arrangements.","details":"In our parliamentary democracy, a government holds office by virtue of its ability to command the confidence of the House of Commons, the membership of which is chosen by the electorate in a general election. It is through their votes, and through their Members of Parliament, that the voice of the electorate can be heard.\n\nVoters are able to make representations to their MPs, who in turn represent the views and interests of their constituents in Parliament. There are no plans to change these arrangements.\n\nThis Government is focused on renewing Britain’s future. We know that for working people that means more money in their pockets, rebuilding our NHS, and strengthening our borders. That’s why, through our Plan for Change, we’ve kick-started the economic growth needed to turn these commitments into reality. We know there’s plenty more to do, but with the foundations fixed, the work of securing Britain’s future can begin.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2025-09-04T08:08:11.509Z","updated_at":"2025-09-04T08:08:11.509Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-03-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-02/debates/DC5D1535-7685-45F4-BFBE-3E1EFAD284C3/PublicRightToAVoteOfNoConfidence","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XUGkwalP08","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0038/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":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":"closed","signature_count":122952,"created_at":"2025-11-10T13:58:45.843Z","updated_at":"2026-06-11T23:00:08.530Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-12-11T12:12:43.647Z","closed_at":"2026-06-11T22:59:59.999Z","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","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-01-30","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-23","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-10T10:22:38.626Z","creator_name":null,"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.\n\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.  \n\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.  \n\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.     \n\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.\n\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":744215,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/744215.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Call a public inquiry into Russian influence on UK politics & democracy","background":"We are concerned about reported efforts from Russia to influence democracy in the US, UK, Europe and elsewhere. We believe we must establish the depth and breadth of possible Russian influence campaigns in the UK.","additional_details":"We believe recent events underscore the urgency of this issue.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":115853,"created_at":"2025-09-29T09:54:02.162Z","updated_at":"2026-05-10T23:00:09.699Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-10T11:31:03.081Z","closed_at":"2026-05-10T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-29T13:41:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T16:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2026-01-15T13:06:02.678Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-29T16:11:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2026-01-16","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-09","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-10T09:28:07.173Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2026-01-15","summary":"Russian interference threats to the UK will be examined as part of the Independent Review of Foreign Financial Interference. Review findings will be presented to the House for scrutiny in late March.","details":"The Government shares the public's concern regarding the threat from Russian interference to UK democracy. The Government will not tolerate attempts to interfere in our politics from any foreign actor and we will take all measures necessary to defend our democracy.\n\nThe UK Government has already announced an independent review, in light of the deeply concerning evidence of Russia’s attempt to influence democracy in the UK. In December 2025, the Government commissioned Philip Rycroft to lead the independent review of foreign financial interference in UK politics, including efforts by Russia. The review will thoroughly assess current financial rules and safeguards, and provide recommendations to mitigate future interference risks. This will include an examination of recent cases of attempted interference in UK politics by a range of foreign actors, including events surrounding the conviction of Reform UK’s former Wales leader, Nathan Gill, for accepting bribes to promote pro-Russian views. \n\nReview conclusions will directly inform the major reforms to protect our elections from foreign interference, which will be set out in a forthcoming elections and democracy bill, and support the Government’s Counter Political Interference and Espionage Action Plan, which aims to make UK politics a harder target for foreign threat actors.\n\nLaunching a new, parallel inquiry at this time would be premature as it would risk prejudging the conclusions of the ongoing review and duplicating its efforts. However, the Government will present the findings of the report by the end of March providing an opportunity for further scrutiny and debate.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2026-01-15T13:06:02.672Z","updated_at":"2026-01-15T13:06:02.672Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-09","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-09/debates/F9F28AFA-E1F3-449C-B18B-63DDCABC411E/RussianInfluenceOnUKPoliticsAndDemocracy","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/BXlk5ufZTDM?si=Fh9-aPCwUVHnhcBM&t=240","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/CDP-2026-0021/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":746363,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/746363.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Keep 5-Year ILR and Restrict Access to Benefits for New ILR Holders","background":"The Government should keep the current 5-year route to Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) and restrict access to government benefits for new ILR holders.","additional_details":"Extending the ILR route to 10 years would unfairly affect thousands of Skilled Worker visa holders who moved to the UK based on existing 5-year rules, disrupting their plans, families, and financial stability. The Government should keep the 5-year ILR route and ensuring new ILR holders demonstrate financial independence before accessing public benefits. We think this protect fairness and stability. ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":244450,"created_at":"2025-10-10T11:35:06.069Z","updated_at":"2026-05-18T23:00:00.355Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-11-18T12:20:30.212Z","closed_at":"2026-05-18T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-10T15:40:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-22T12:36:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.923Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-23T15:53:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:49:54.168Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"As set out in the Immigration White Paper, the default qualifying period doubles to 10 years. We welcome views on other measures, including access to benefits, via the earned settlement consultation.","details":"Settlement in the UK is a privilege and not a right. It is a prerequisite for becoming a British citizen and brings lifelong benefits. It marks an important step in integrating and contributing to local communities and the wider country.\n\nUnder the current system, individuals qualify for settlement primarily on the basis of the length of time they have spent in the UK alongside a knowledge of life test which is used to verify knowledge of British customs, history, traditions, laws and political system.\n\nThese criteria alone do not reflect our strongly held belief that people should contribute to the economy and society before gaining settled status in the UK. Moreover, they fail to promote integration, which limits the wider benefit from long term migration into the UK and increases pressure on public services.\n\nWe therefore intend to fundamentally reform our settlement rules for the first time in over 50 years. The Immigration White Paper, published on 12 May 2025, set out that the default qualifying period for settlement would be increased from five to ten years. It also included proposals for a new ‘earned settlement’ model which are subject to consultation.\n\nThe consultation on the ‘earned settlement’ model launched on 20 November 2025 and will run for 12 weeks until 12 February 2026. It is open to anyone who wishes to share their views, including individuals, organisations and other stakeholders who may be affected by, or have an interest in, the proposed changes.\n\nWe are proposing to increase the baseline qualifying period for settlement to 15 years for those on the Skilled Worker route in a role below RQF level 6 (equivalent to a bachelor’s degree). \n\nIn the next five years, settlement volumes are forecast to increase significantly, due to the unprecedented level of migration to the UK in recent years. Between 2021 and 2024, there was significant growth in lower-skilled migration on work routes, particularly on the Health and Social Care visa, which is estimated to make up 47% of settlement grants in 2028.\n\nIndividuals will have the opportunity to reduce the qualifying period to settlement based on contributions to the UK economy and society.\n\nSpeaking English at degree level, earning a high salary and being employed in specific public service roles would result in a reduction. However, where a person has claimed public funds or committed immigration offences, they would face a penalty of extra years. \n\nWe are also proposing that benefits and social housing might not be available to new migrants granted settled status and that instead they should be reserved for those who have achieved British citizenship, easing the pressure on public finances.\n\nFor those who are on a pathway to settlement but have not yet been granted settled status, we are consulting on transitional arrangements for these individuals. \n\nWe would encourage anyone with an interest in the proposals, including the petitioners who have taken the time to sign this petition, to contribute to the consultation. We realise the significance of these proposals to people and we will listen carefully to what they tell us.\n\nFurther details on the proposals and the link to respond to the consultation can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/earned-settlement\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:09:28.921Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727372,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727372.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Protect Legal Migrants: do not implement the 10-Year ILR proposal","background":"We urge the UK Government to scrap plans to extend ILR from 5 to 10 years. We feel that legal migrants, especially care workers, followed the rules and built lives here under the 5-year promise. We think they support vital services and deserve fairness, not shifting rules.","additional_details":"We think that retroactively extending ILR from 5 to 10 years is unfair. We are concerned that it creates insecurity for legal migrants, disrupts vital sectors like health and care, and adds financial strain. We urge the UK Government to withdraw this proposal, protect visa renewals, and prioritise tackling illegal migration. Do not penalise those who follow the law, support the economy, and uphold British values. We think legal migration must be protected, not discouraged.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":106570,"created_at":"2025-05-12T18:11:04.037Z","updated_at":"2026-02-03T10:27:55.471Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-05-23T15:26:53.533Z","closed_at":"2025-11-23T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-12T21:44:00.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-03T09:34:30.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.530Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-13T10:18:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-02-02","debate_outcome_at":"2026-02-03T08:48:30.921Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-12-04","summary":"The earned settlement consultation is seeking views on whether the increase in settlement qualifying period will apply to people already in the UK. No decision has been taken on this point.","details":"The Government is grateful for the vital contribution legal migrants make to the UK, including the dedication of overseas health and care workers who deliver high quality care and strengthen our public services.\n\nThis issue has already been the subject of previous petitions and parliamentary debate earlier this year, including the e-petition ‘Keep the 5-Year ILR pathway for existing Skilled Worker visa holders’ (Petition 727360) and ‘Keep 5-year ILR terms to Hong Kong British National (Overseas) visas’ (Petition 727356), which was debated in Westminster Hall on 8 September 2025. The Home Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into ‘Routes to Settlement’ on 21 October 2025.\n\nAs set out by the Home Secretary in ‘A Fairer Pathway to Settlement’, the Government is proposing a new, contribution-based settlement model. Under these proposals, the standard qualifying period for settlement will be 10 years. However, individuals will have the opportunity to reduce this period if they demonstrate strong contributions to the UK’s economy and society for example, through sustained employment, National Insurance contributions, English language ability, a clean criminal record, and positive community engagement. Those who have been non-compliant may be required to wait longer or be refused settlement.\n\nThese are proposals only. No final decisions have been made, and we launched a consultation on the earned settlement proposals on 20 November 2025. The consultation will run for 12 weeks (until 12 February 2026) and is open to all interested parties, including migrants, employers, representative bodies, and members of the public. Its purpose is to gather a wide range of views and evidence on the proposed changes, including the impact on those already in the UK and the practicalities of implementation. The consultation is, in particular, seeking views on whether there should be transitional arrangements for those already on a pathway to settlement.\n\nThe Government is committed to a transparent and inclusive process. The consultation is being publicised widely, and responses can be submitted online or in writing. All feedback will be carefully considered before any final decisions are made. A summary of responses and the Government’s conclusions will be published after the consultation closes, ensuring that the process is open and accountable. Following the consultation, we will provide full details of how the new model would work, including any transitional arrangements for people already in the UK. We encourage all affected groups including health and care workers to take part in the consultation so that their views and evidence inform the final approach.\n\nSettlement in the UK is a significant step, bringing lifelong benefits and supporting integration into local communities and the wider country. The Government’s aim is to ensure that settlement is earned through contribution and integration, while maintaining strong safeguards for the most vulnerable. The new model will continue to offer a shorter pathway to settlement for non-UK dependants of British citizens and retain existing protections for victims of domestic violence and abuse.\nWe recognise the concerns raised about fairness and the impact on those who have built their lives in the UK under the current system. We will consider these issues carefully, and no changes will be made without listening to the views of those affected.\n\nFurther information on the proposals announced by the Home Secretary is available in Ministerial statements, November 2025 Command Paper, as well as the May 2025 Immigration White Paper.\n\nWe are grateful to the petitioners for setting out their views, and we look forward to hearing from them again when they have had the opportunity to study the final proposals in detail.\n\nHome Office","created_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z","updated_at":"2025-12-05T08:40:29.527Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-02-02","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-02-02/debates/A0693D73-AD95-418E-86A6-FAB882454522/IndefiniteLeaveToRemain","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/yRZnXiYnZ1Q?si=nzQy_-BAtn0r9S3b&t=254","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0006/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":718660,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Introduce Licensing and Regulation for Dog and Cat Rescues to Protect Welfare\r\n","background":"Many UK animal rescues operate without clear legal oversight, creating opportunities for unethical practices. Some rescues have been linked to supporting irresponsible breeding, neglecting animals, or misusing public donations. ","additional_details":"Without enforceable standards, there is a risk that animals suffer in poor conditions, and public trust is undermined. We call on the Government to introduce mandatory licensing and regular inspections to ensure rescues operate transparently and uphold high welfare standards. Regulation is essential to prevent cruelty, improve accountability, and ensure all rescued animals receive proper care.  \r\n \r\nBy introducing clear legal requirements, the Government can safeguard animal welfare, protect public confidence in rescues, and prevent organizations from operating irresponsibly.  ","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":109647,"created_at":"2025-02-21T07:32:44.335Z","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:55:27.633Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-08T14:27:32.559Z","closed_at":"2025-10-08T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-27T21:44:50.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-16T17:49:00.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.733Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-17T07:50:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-26","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-27T09:50:42.023Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-10","summary":"Animal rescue organisations must meet existing statutory welfare requirements. Moving forward, the Government is developing an animal welfare strategy and will outline more detail in due course.","details":"The Government appreciates the important work that responsible animal sanctuaries as well as rescue and rehoming organisations do, often on a voluntary basis, to ensure that animals taken into the care of these organisations are offered the opportunity of a forever home. \n\nThere are existing protections under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, whereby any person responsible for an animal, whether on a permanent or temporary basis, has a duty to ensure the welfare of the animals in their care. Companion animal rescue and rehoming organisations in England and Wales must therefore comply with statutory welfare requirements set out in the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Therefore, the Department encourages individuals to report any concerns regarding whether these standards are being met to the relevant local authority, which has powers to investigate.\n\nMembers of the public can also check if the rescue centre they use is a member of the Association of Dogs and Cats Homes, which has set clear standards for animal assessments, neutering and rehoming procedures that all members adhere to.\n\nMore broadly, the Department is developing an overarching approach to animal welfare and, as part of this, is actively considering the animal welfare protections in place in rescue and rehoming centres, including whether there is a need for additional guidance or regulation. The Department has also initiated a series of meetings with key animal welfare stakeholders as part of this wider work. We will be outlining more detail in due course.\n\nDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/718660)","created_at":"2025-06-06T07:49:36.731Z","updated_at":"2025-07-17T10:45:39.625Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-26/debates/D4C51DDC-9C32-4F43-B598-CB8C3C82B90F/AnimalRescueCentres","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuVIHqnrV5M","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0013/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/licensing-regulation-animal-rescues/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":729440,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/729440.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Make Play and Continuous Provision statutory in England's Key Stage 1 Curriculum","background":"Revise statutory guidance for KS1 to make play based pedagogy a core part of the Key Stage One National Curriculum, extending the best practice that we see in Early Years to ensure all Key Stage One children continue to have a developmentally appropriate play based approach to their learning.","additional_details":"The Early Years Framework highlights the importance of play. However, as children transition to Year 1 and throughout KS1, many may experience a stark shift to formal teaching strategies. We think this fails to reflect how young children learn best. We want our children to access a reformed education system that meets their developmental needs, supports wellbeing, allows for movement, communication, play and develops a true love of learning, enabling all children to thrive.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":106082,"created_at":"2025-06-04T22:00:07.094Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T10:28:27.465Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-03T12:54:20.577Z","closed_at":"2026-01-03T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-05T09:36:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-05T11:51:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.577Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-30T22:10:50.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-26","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-27T09:47:52.250Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-01","summary":"We recognise play is critical to children’s wellbeing and development which is why the Department is working to make sure that all children have access to these enrichment opportunities at school.","details":"The Department is working to make sure that all children and young people have access to a variety of enrichment opportunities at school, as an important part of our mission to break down barriers to opportunity. For some schools, these opportunities may be used to encourage children and young people to play.\n\nWe recognise that play is critical to children’s wellbeing and development, as highlighted in the Centre for Young Lives’ Everything to Play For report. This is reflected in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) statutory framework, which is clear that play is essential for children’s learning and development. The EYFS emphasises the importance of creating opportunities for indoor and outdoor play, and enabling environments and cultures for high-quality play.\n\nOur expectation is for schools to organise the school day and school week in the best interests of their pupil cohort, to both provide them with a full time education suitable to their age, aptitude and ability, and to provide opportunities for schools to incorporate time for play and other activities.\n\nWe recognise the current key stage 1 curriculum requires reform. This is why the Government established an independent Curriculum and Assessment Review, to look into issues, such as this, and make recommendations to improve the curriculum for children. The Review Group is currently looking across the existing national curriculum and statutory assessment system, to ensure they meet the needs of young people in your area and across England.\n\nThe Review’s final report and recommendations will be published in autumn, at which point the Government will be in a position to consider any changes to the curriculum. The Government will consult with education experts, teachers, and parents to ensure the very best for children in England.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.575Z","updated_at":"2025-08-01T10:01:44.575Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-26","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-26/debates/95E8607E-8004-4B1F-A74A-18505A90FAE2/KeyStage1Curriculum","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HS6698xi0M","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2026-0020/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/play-curriculum/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":732559,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/732559.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Limit the sale of fireworks to those running local council approved events only","background":"Ban the sale of fireworks to the general public to minimise the harm caused to vulnerable people and animals. Defenceless animals can die from the distress caused by fireworks.\r\n\r\nI believe that permitting unregulated use of fireworks is an act of wide-scale cruelty to animals.","additional_details":" \r\n \r\n","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":195930,"created_at":"2025-07-06T14:27:42.186Z","updated_at":"2026-05-01T12:03:42.266Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-08-20T10:08:00.535Z","closed_at":"2026-02-20T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-06T20:30:30.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T18:36:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.287Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-09T20:23:40.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:23:55.089Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-18","summary":"The Government recognises the negative impact fireworks can have on some people and animals.  However, when used responsibly they are a source of enjoyment for many people. ","details":"The Government’s intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, while reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property. The majority of individuals who use fireworks do so in a responsible and safe manner and there are enforcement mechanisms in place to tackle situations when fireworks are misused.\n\nAt this point in time the Government does not have any plans to ban the sale of fireworks to consumers. We have launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside encouraging people to consider going to a public display. Public displays are more likely to be well-publicised, providing people with an opportunity to prepare ahead of the display taking place. The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks. This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately. My safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA regulatory framework currently controls the sale, availability, and use of fireworks to consumers. For example, there is an 11pm curfew in place for the use of fireworks, with later exceptions only for the traditional firework periods of November 5th, Diwali, New Year’s Eve and the Chinese New Year. Using fireworks outside the curfew hours is a criminal offence enforced by the police and can lead to imprisonment and a substantial fine.  There is also a maximum noise level of 120 decibels with many retailers also offering ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks.\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used.  \n\nTo inform any future action the Government will continue to engage with businesses, consumer groups and charities to gather evidence on the issues with and impacts of fireworks.  \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade","created_at":"2025-11-18T12:56:17.285Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T12:57:00.440Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"BT","name":"Department for Business and Trade","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-and-trade"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":738192,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the maximum noise level for consumer fireworks from 120 to 90 decibels","background":"We think each year, individuals suffer because of loud fireworks. We believe horses, dogs, cats, livestock and wildlife can be terrified by noisy fireworks and many people find them intolerable.","additional_details":"There is independent research suggesting: \r\n\r\n• Over half of dog owners report fireworks-anxiety in their dog\r\n• There’s an 81% increase in missing dogs around Bonfire Night\r\n• Almost 25% of military veterans say fireworks have caused a negative experience for them\r\n\r\nWe think both humans and animals are less likely to be distressed by fireworks noise below 90dB. We believe lower noise levels would allow fireworks to be enjoyed while potentially reducing some of their many negative impacts.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":184376,"created_at":"2025-08-18T08:48:05.528Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T11:00:29.806Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-09-04T13:29:13.913Z","closed_at":"2026-03-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-18T09:56:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-10-04T15:43:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.890Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-11-03T14:00:10.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-19","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-19","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-20T15:22:32.649Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-11-07","summary":"The Government recognises that some people have strong feelings about fireworks and has been listening to concerns raised by members of the public regarding the impact of firework noise.","details":"The Government's intention is to minimise the negative impact of fireworks and to support their considerate use, reducing the risks and disturbances to individuals, animals, and property.  Current regulations control their sale, availability, and use, including setting a maximum noise level of 120 decibels for consumer fireworks. Many retailers also offer ‘lower noise’ and ‘no bang’ fireworks which are available to purchase by consumers.\n\nFireworks, when used responsibly are a source of enjoyment for many people.  The Government recognises however the concerns raised by signatories to this petition regarding the potential impact fireworks can have on communities and animals.  \n\nThe Government is engaging with businesses, consumer groups and charities to better understand the issues with and impacts of fireworks. Noise is one of the key issues we are seeking views on. The Government is also considering the experience of other countries where lower noise limits are in place for consumer fireworks to understand the impact this has had and to identify best practice.\n\nFor this fireworks season, to ensure people continue to use fireworks in a safe and considerate manner, the Government has launched a fireworks campaign for this fireworks season to provide guidance on minimising the impacts of fireworks on animal welfare and encouraging responsible use. Lower noise fireworks are promoted in the campaign alongside considerate use.  This supplements existing guidance from Government and other organisations that is available to help people to use fireworks safely and appropriately.  The campaign also includes new guidance for those running community fireworks events, and social media posts that emphasise the risks from the misuse of fireworks.  \n\nMy safety: fireworks - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/my-safety-fireworks)\nOrganising non-professional fireworks displays - GOV.UK (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/organising-non-professional-fireworks-displays)\n\nA number of animal welfare organisations, along with industry and local authorities, provide advice and guidance to enable people to minimise the negative impacts of fireworks on people, animals and our communities. We work closely with these organisations to amplify this messaging in the run up to, and during, key dates when fireworks are commonly used. \n\nDepartment for Business and Trade\n\nThis is a revised response. The Petitions Committee requested a response which more directly addressed the request of the petition. You can find the original response towards the bottom of the petition page (https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/738192)","created_at":"2025-10-23T12:35:09.887Z","updated_at":"2025-11-18T15:28:36.600Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-19","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-19/debates/C0AE7A79-B8C1-4E33-8CB7-A9AAD98B62E6/SaleOfFireworks","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/G1ntVoBByDE","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn05704/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/fireworks/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DEFRA","name":"Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-environment-food-rural-affairs"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727309,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727309.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Call an immediate general election","background":"We want an immediate general election to be held. We think the majority need and want change.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":1059230,"created_at":"2025-05-12T05:53:57.501Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.037Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-05T09:37:54.250Z","closed_at":"2025-12-05T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-13T16:30:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-16T15:06:50.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.937Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-08-06T11:53:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-12","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-14T17:20:59.292Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-08-11","summary":"This Government was elected on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election. Our full focus is on fixing the foundations, rebuilding Britain, and restoring public confidence in government.","details":"The Prime Minister can call a general election at a time of their choosing by requesting a dissolution of Parliament from the Sovereign within the five-year life of a Parliament. The Government was elected by the British people on a mandate of change at the July 2024 general election.\n\nThis Government is fixing the foundations and delivering change with investment and reform to deliver growth, with more jobs, more money in people’s pockets, to rebuild Britain and get the NHS back on its feet. This will be built on the strong foundations of a stable economy, national security and secure borders as we put politics back in the service of working people.\n\nOn entering office, a £22 billion black hole was identified in the nation’s finances. We inherited unprecedented challenges, with crumbling public services and crippled public finances, but will deliver a decade of national renewal through our five missions: economic growth, fixing the NHS, safer streets, making Britain a clean energy super-power and opportunity for all. This is what was promised and is what we are delivering.\n\nThe Government’s first Budget freed up tens of billions of pounds to invest in Britain’s future while locking in stability, preventing devastating austerity in our public services and protecting working people’s payslips.\n\nMission-led government rejects the sticking-plaster solutions of the past and unites public and private sectors, national, devolved and local government, business and unions, and the whole of civil society in a shared purpose. The Government will continue to deliver the manifesto of change that it was elected on.\n\nCabinet Office","created_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:01.935Z","updated_at":"2025-08-12T08:30:38.590Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-12","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-12/debates/49F4AFFB-2D48-44D4-AE24-1DC5262CD9C7/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/9A_Mm9hZO4o","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0251/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"CO","name":"Cabinet Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/cabinet-office"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":727514,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/727514.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Reduce the school week to four days a week","background":"We urge the Government to require all schools to reduce the school week to four instead of five days by making each school day one hour longer whilst requiring the school week to be four instead of five days.","additional_details":"","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":126014,"created_at":"2025-05-14T09:44:32.926Z","updated_at":"2026-03-18T16:54:56.582Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-06-04T10:13:43.683Z","closed_at":"2025-12-04T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-05-14T10:01:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-18T06:28:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.659Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-20T13:29:30.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-05","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-06T10:12:33.567Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-10","summary":"The government has no plans to reduce the school week to four days. Regular attendance at school is vital for children’s education, well-being and long-term development as well as parental employment.","details":"The government has no plans to require schools to reduce the length of the school week from five days to four by adding an additional hour to each of the four days.\n\nTo ensure children across the country have sufficient time in school to enable them to achieve and thrive, the Government has set a minimum expectation that all state-funded, mainstream schools will deliver a minimum school week of 32 hours and 30 minutes. Consistency in the length of the school week is essential for providing equal learning opportunities that will enable children and young people to achieve and thrive. While most state funded schools already meet this requirement, schools that don’t are encouraged to move towards doing so as soon as possible. \n\nReducing the school week to four days whilst still delivering the minimum expectation would mean a minimum school day of over 8 hours. Schools would have to deliver an additional 1 hour and 38 minutes per day across the four days to meet the weekly minimum requirement. \n\nReducing the school week would also have a damaging impact on parents, many of whom would need to make additional arrangements for childcare, reduce their working hours or potentially leave the workforce altogether. This would in turn put families under financial strain and have a damaging effect on the country’s economy.\n\nBeing in school, enjoying a broad and balanced education and achieving academically are key protective factors that help to promote mental health and well-being. Considering the wider benefits of time in school, the government therefore has no plans to reduce the school week from five days to four.\n\nDepartment for Education","created_at":"2025-10-10T12:00:38.656Z","updated_at":"2025-10-13T12:40:29.512Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-05","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-01-05/debates/19F9E3C3-4B57-4221-BC1F-38C236441355/LengthOfTheSchoolWeek","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/JJDrsAcGzHY","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn07148/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/length-school-week/index.html","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfE","name":"Department for Education","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-education"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":702845,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/702845.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Extend free bus travel for people over 60 in England","background":"We call on the Government to extend free bus travel to all people over 60 years old in England outside London. We believe the current situation is unjust and we want equality for everyone over 60. ","additional_details":"Currently, people in England who do not live in London are not entitled to free bus travel until they reach the state pension age, which we believe has changed dramatically. As people get older some over 60s drive less and less, therefore we believe we need equality on public transport. It would mean England had the same provision as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":101204,"created_at":"2024-11-24T12:27:59.770Z","updated_at":"2026-03-26T16:33:35.784Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2024-12-27T11:26:30.209Z","closed_at":"2025-06-27T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2024-11-25T06:06:20.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-02-05T05:30:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.210Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-26T15:26:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-12-04","scheduled_debate_date":"2026-01-05","debate_outcome_at":"2026-01-06T10:11:15.488Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-02-12","summary":"The English National Concessionary Travel Scheme costs around £700 million annually. Any changes to the statutory scheme must be carefully considered for their impact on its financial sustainability. ","details":"The government wants everyone to have access to public transport and is committed to improving services. We also recognise the importance of the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS) in supporting local bus travel, assisting with access to essential local services and helping those who use it to stay active and avoid isolation.\n\nThe ENCTS provides free off-peak bus travel to those with eligible disabilities and those of state pension age, currently sixty-six. The ENCTS costs around £700 million annually and any changes to the statutory obligations, such as lowering the age of eligibility, would therefore need to be carefully considered for its impact on the scheme’s financial sustainability.   \n\nLocal authorities in England do have the power to offer concessions in addition to their statutory obligations, for example, by extending the age of eligibility for the older persons’ bus pass. These are additional local concessions provided and funded by local authorities from local resources, depending on the needs and priorities of each area.\n\nAt the Budget on 30 October, the government confirmed a £1 billion boost for buses, of which £712 million has been allocated to local authorities to support and improve bus services. Funding allocated to local authorities to improve services for passengers can be used in whichever way they wish. This could include extending the discretionary concessions available in the local area.\n\nConcessionary travel is a devolved policy area and as such, the eligibility age for the bus pass differs between the devolved nations of the United Kingdom. This means, in effect, that there are different schemes in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, so the administrative arrangements are entirely separate.\n\nDepartment for Transport","created_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.208Z","updated_at":"2025-02-12T13:23:22.208Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2026-01-05","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-01-05/debates/B84513B0-9668-4082-B440-DCFB18F22112/FreeBusTravelOver-60S","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/id1c1yZlOMY","debate_pack_url":"","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"DfT","name":"Department for Transport","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-transport"}],"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","id":722903,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Repeal the Online Safety Act","background":"We want the Government to repeal the Online Safety act. ","additional_details":"We believe that the scope of the Online Safety act is far broader and restrictive than is necessary in a free society.\r\nFor instance, the definitions in Part 2 covers online hobby forums, which we think do not have the resource to comply with the act and so are shutting down instead.\r\nWe think that Parliament should repeal the act and work towards producing proportionate legislation rather than risking clamping down on civil society talking about trains, football, video games or even hamsters because it can't deal with individual bad faith actors.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":550136,"created_at":"2025-03-20T19:05:13.386Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:26.046Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-04-22T14:53:36.080Z","closed_at":"2025-10-22T22:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-03-21T00:04:40.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-15T10:34:10.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.825Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-07-25T19:21:00.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-15","debate_outcome_at":"2026-03-04T10:18:45.939Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-07-28","summary":"The Government is working with Ofcom to ensure that online in-scope services are subject to robust but proportionate regulation through the effective implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023. ","details":"I would like to thank all those who signed the petition. It is right that the regulatory regime for in scope online services takes a proportionate approach, balancing the protection of users from online harm with the ability for low-risk services to operate effectively and provide benefits to users.\n\nThe Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and effectively as possible to enable UK users to benefit from its protections.\n\nProportionality is a core principle of the Act and is in-built into its duties. As regulator for the online safety regime, Ofcom must consider the size and risk level of different types and kinds of services when recommending steps providers can take to comply with requirements. Duties in the Communications Act 2003 require Ofcom to act with proportionality and target action only where it is needed.\n\nSome duties apply to all user-to-user and search services in scope of the Act. This includes risk assessments, including determining if children are likely to access the service and, if so, assessing the risks of harm to children. While many services carry low risks of harm, the risk assessment duties are key to ensuring that risky services of all sizes do not slip through the net of regulation. For example, the Government is very concerned about small platforms that host harmful content, such as forums dedicated to encouraging suicide or self-harm. Exempting small services from the Act would mean that services like these forums would not be subject to the Act’s enforcement powers. Even forums that might seem harmless carry potential risks, such as where adults come into contact with child users.\n\nOnce providers have carried out their duties to conduct risk assessments, they must protect the users of their service from the identified risks of harm. Ofcom’s illegal content Codes of Practice set out recommended measures to help providers comply with these obligations, measures that are tailored in relation to both size and risk. If a provider’s risk assessment accurately determines that the risks faced by users are low across all harms, Ofcom’s Codes specify that they only need some basic measures, including:\n\n• easy-to-find, understandable terms and conditions;\n• a complaints tool that allows users to report illegal material when they see it, backed up by a process to deal with those complaints;\n• the ability to review content and take it down if it is illegal (or breaches their terms of service);\n• a specific individual responsible for compliance, who Ofcom can contact if needed.\n\nWhere a children's access assessment indicates a platform is likely to be accessed by children, a subsequent risk assessment must be conducted to identify measures for mitigating risks. Like the Codes of Practice on illegal content, Ofcom’s recently issued child safety Codes also tailor recommendations based on risk level. For example, highly effective age assurance is recommended for services likely accessed by children that do not already prohibit and remove harmful content such as pornography and suicide promotion.  Providers of services likely to be accessed by UK children were required to complete their assessment, which Ofcom may request, by 24 July.\n\nOn 8 July, Ofcom’s CEO wrote to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology noting Ofcom’s responsibility for regulating a wide range of highly diverse services, including those run by businesses, but also charities, community and voluntary groups, individuals, and many services that have not been regulated before.\n\nThe letter notes that the Act’s aim is not to penalise small, low-risk services trying to comply in good faith. Ofcom – and the Government – recognise that many small services are dynamic small businesses supporting innovation and offer significant value to their communities. Ofcom will take a sensible approach to enforcement with smaller services that present low risk to UK users, only taking action where it is proportionate and appropriate, and will focus on cases where the risk and impact of harm is highest.\n\nOfcom has developed an extensive programme of work designed to support a smoother journey to compliance, particularly for smaller firms. This has been underpinned by interviews, workshops and research with a diverse range of online services to ensure the tools meet the needs of different types of services. Ofcom’s letter notes its ‘guide for services’ guidance and tools hub, and its participation in events run by other organisations and networks including those for people running small services, as well as its commitment to review and improve materials and tools to help support services to create a safer life online.\n\nThe Government will continue to work with Ofcom towards the full implementation of the Online Safety Act 2023, including monitoring proportionate implementation.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z","updated_at":"2025-07-28T14:02:03.822Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-15","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-12-15/debates/DA0F7CFE-CCED-4864-BCCF-160E0AF56F92/OnlineSafetyAct2023Repeal","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ixue9rQbi0","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2025-0224/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"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":730194,"links":{"self":"https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/730194.json"},"attributes":{"action":"Do not introduce Digital ID cards","background":"We demand that the UK Government immediately commits to not introducing a digital ID cards. There are reports that this is being looked at.","additional_details":"We think this would be a step towards mass surveillance and digital control, and that no one should be forced to register with a state-controlled ID system. We oppose the creation of any national ID system. \r\n \r\nID cards were scrapped in 2010, in our view for good reason.","committee_note":"","state":"closed","signature_count":2984191,"created_at":"2025-06-12T15:26:34.449Z","updated_at":"2026-04-27T10:00:25.998Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2025-07-09T15:28:15.595Z","closed_at":"2026-01-09T23:59:59.999Z","moderation_threshold_reached_at":"2025-06-17T16:12:10.000Z","response_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-03T12:00:20.000Z","government_response_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.956Z","debate_threshold_reached_at":"2025-09-22T12:28:20.000Z","debate_scheduled_on":"2025-11-13","scheduled_debate_date":"2025-12-08","debate_outcome_at":"2025-12-09T13:28:36.897Z","creator_name":null,"rejection":null,"government_response":{"responded_on":"2025-10-02","summary":"We will introduce a digital ID within this Parliament to help tackle illegal migration, make accessing government services easier, and enable wider efficiencies. We will consult on details soon. ","details":"The Government has announced plans to introduce a digital ID system which is fit for the needs of modern Britain. We are committed to making people’s everyday lives easier and more secure, to putting more control in their hands (including over their own data), and to driving growth through harnessing digital technology. We also want to learn from countries which have digitised government services for the benefit of their citizens, in line with our manifesto commitment to modernise government.\n\nCurrently, when UK citizens and residents use public services, start a new job, or, for example, buy alcohol, they often need to present an assortment of physical documents to prove who they are or things about themselves. This is both bureaucratic for the individual and creates space for abuse and fraud. This includes known issues with illegal working and modern slavery, while the fragmented approach and multiple systems across Government make it difficult for people to access vital services. Further, there are too many people who are excluded, like the 1 in 10 UK adults who don’t have a physical photo ID, so can struggle to prove who they are and access the products and services they are entitled to.\n\nTo tackle these interlinked issues, we will introduce a new national digital ID. This is not a card but a new digital identity that will be available for free to all UK citizens and legal residents aged 16 and over (although we will consider through consultation if this should be age 13 and over). Over time, people will be able to use it to seamlessly access a range of public and private sector services, with the aim of making our everyday lives easier and more secure. It will not be compulsory to obtain a digital ID but it will be mandatory for some applications.\n\nFor example, the new digital ID will build on GOV.UK One Login and the GOV.UK Wallet to drive the transformation of public services. Over time, this system will allow people to access government services – such as benefits or tax records – without needing to remember multiple logins or provide physical documents. It will significantly streamline interactions with the state, saving time and reducing frustrating paperwork, while also helping to create opportunities for more joined up government services. International examples show how beneficial this can be. For instance, Estonia’s system reportedly saves each citizen hours every month by streamlining unnecessary bureaucracy, and the move to becoming a digital society has saved taxpayer money.\n\nBy the end of this Parliament, employers will have to check the new digital ID when conducting a ‘right to work’ check. This will help combat criminal gangs who promise access to the UK labour market in order to profit from dangerous and illegal channel crossings. It will create a fairer system between UK citizens and legal residents, crack down on forged documents, and streamline the process for employers, driving up compliance. Further, it will create business information showing where employers are conducting checks, so driving more targeted action against non-compliant employers.\n\nFor clarity, it will not be a criminal offence to not hold a digital ID and police will not be able to demand to see a digital ID as part of a “stop and search.”\n\nPrivacy and security will also be central to the digital ID programme. We will follow data protection law and best practice in creating a system which people can rightly put their trust in. People in the UK already know and trust digital credentials held in their phone wallets to use in their everyday lives, from paying for things to storing boarding passes. The new system will be built on similar technology and be your boarding pass to government. Digitally checkable digital credentials are more secure than physical documents which can be lost, copied or forged, and often mean sharing more information than just what is necessary for a given transaction.\nThe new system will be designed in accordance with the highest security standards to protect against a comprehensive range of threats, including cyber-attacks.\n\nWe will launch a public consultation in the coming weeks and work closely with employers, trade unions, civil society groups and other stakeholders, to co-design the scheme and ensure it is as secure and inclusive as possible. Following consultation, we will seek to bring forward legislation to underpin this system.\n\nDepartment for Science, Innovation and Technology","created_at":"2025-10-02T15:25:09.953Z","updated_at":"2025-10-02T15:29:00.740Z"},"debate":{"debated_on":"2025-12-08","transcript_url":"https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-08/debates/9E01F17C-557A-4D02-8A93-B573721B8B20/a","video_url":"https://www.youtube.com/live/dCGWpaAfJIw","debate_pack_url":"https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10369/","public_engagement_url":"","debate_summary_url":"","overview":""},"departments":[{"acronym":"HO","name":"Home Office","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/home-office"}],"topics":[]}}]}