The comprehensive economic and trade agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the Republic of India will enter into force for the United Kingdom today.

This follows both the United Kingdom and India completing the necessary domestic legal and operational procedures to bring the agreement into force. Article 30.6 of the agreement provides for entry into force on a date agreed by the parties. The Government have worked closely with India to ensure an expedited entry into force, enabling businesses and consumers to benefit from the agreement as quickly as possible. This is the fastest that the UK has brought a new FTA from signature to entry into force.

India is currently the United Kingdom’s 11th-largest trading partner and is forecast to become the world's third-largest economy by 2031. As India continues to grow, the agreement positions UK businesses to benefit from new and expanded opportunities in one of the fastest-growing major economies in the world.

The UK-India CETA is a landmark agreement. It is the UK’s most economically significant bilateral trade deal since leaving the EU and will support economic growth across every region and nation across the United Kingdom. It will help put money back into working people’s pockets and delivers on the Government’s plan for change. In the long run, the agreement is expected to increase bilateral trade by £25.5 billion, increase UK GDP by £4.8 billion, and boost wages by £2.2 billion per year. The UK is already seeing anticipatory benefits, with total UK-India trade reaching £47.9 billion last year, an increase of 10% year on year.

From the first day of entry into force, there are significant benefits for the UK. Our exporters will benefit from tariff reductions worth around £400 million per year, rising to approximately £900 million once tariff staging is complete. Average Indian tariffs on UK goods will fall from around 15% to 3%. This includes major cuts for gin and whiskies distillers, with the tariff falling from 150% to 75% at EIF, and down to 40% by year 10; automotive companies, who will benefit from the tariff dropping from up to 110% down to 10% within a quota; and cosmetic companies, with a drop from 22% down to as low as 0%, based on the product line.

The agreement also delivers preferential and unprecedented access to India’s federal Government procurement market, guarantees market access for UK services suppliers, and makes trade quicker, cheaper and easier through improved customs procedures and digital trade provisions, which will particularly help small and medium-sized enterprises to break into the market.

The benefits of the agreement will be felt across all nations and regions of the United Kingdom. Every region is expected to see economic gains, including an estimated £190 million boost for both the west midlands and Scotland, and £210 million for the north-west of England. The agreement also supports the Government’s industrial strategy by backing high-growth sectors across the UK economy.

This agreement represents more than just an improvement in trading terms. At a time when global economic norms are under pressure, this deal demonstrates the United Kingdom’s commitment to open, rules-based trade and to building resilient, long-term partnerships with trusted partners. The UK-India CETA is India’s most ambitious trade agreement to date that they have brought into force, including India’s first ever chapters on anti-corruption, consumer protection, labour rights, the environment, gender and development, and contains the strongest environmental commitments India has agreed to in any trade agreement. It also provides a strong foundation on which the United Kingdom and India can build an even more ambitious trading partnership in the years ahead.

The Government consider this agreement to be a long-term strategic investment in the United Kingdom’s prosperity. To date, we have engaged with more than 9,000 businesses across the United Kingdom and India to help them prepare for entry into force. Going forward, the Government will focus on supporting businesses to make full use of the opportunities provided by the agreement, and on monitoring its implementation closely, including through established agreement governance structures such as the Joint Economic and Trade Committee, to identify and address any issues that may arise. It is now for businesses in India and the UK to exploit the opportunities that the agreement affords.

I would like to thank Members of both Houses for their engagement and scrutiny during the ratification of this agreement.

[HCWS262]

Today the Government are publishing their model action plan for responding to significant data breaches.

The model action plan establishes a clear, consistent and co-ordinated approach to managing significant personal data breaches for Government Departments and arm’s length bodies while respecting their own accountabilities and their legal position as distinct data controllers. Publishing the MAP forms part of our commitment to raise information security standards. Implementing the MAP is a visible commitment to the public and to Parliament that the Government have a plan in place to minimise harm from future breaches.

I have placed a copy of the model action plan for responding to significant data breaches in the Library of each House. The model action plan will also be published on gov.uk.

[HCWS250]

Today, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services has published its report on how effectively His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs prevents and investigates insider risk, following an inspection in January and February 2024. I take the findings of this report extremely seriously and have been clear to HMRC that the findings needed to be acted on.

This independent inspection was commissioned by HMRC in recognition of the importance of security and resilience. The Department has been clear that it has a zero-tolerance approach to insider threat and, where criminal wrongdoing is identified, it takes swift action including dismissal and will pursue criminal prosecutions.

It is important to set out the context for this report: the fieldwork took place in January and February 2024, and the findings reflect the position more than two and a half years ago. All of the case studies referenced by inspectors had already been identified and dealt with by HMRC’s internal investigations before being shared with HMICFRS.

Senior officials have assured me that the Department has taken appropriate and proportionate action in all case studies, based on its policies. All of these decisions were taken in 2023.

HMRC is effective at detecting and taking action against internal fraud. Since the period covered by the report, the Department has taken significant steps to strengthen its controls and capability. HMRC has substantially completed 20 of the 22 recommendations, with further work under way on the remaining two.

These improvements include expanding and strengthening its internal investigations function, including increasing staffing and enhancing its ability to identify and respond to risks. The Department has introduced new systems, including a dedicated case management and intelligence platform, to improve the speed and effectiveness of investigations.

HMRC has also implemented a broader programme of reform that goes beyond the report’s recommendations. This includes establishing a dedicated insider risk management service to co-ordinate activity across the Department, strengthening governance through senior-level oversight, and enhancing data sharing between security, HR and investigative functions.

In addition, HMRC has placed greater emphasis on prevention and organisational culture. It has introduced mandatory training on internal fraud, bribery and insider risk for all staff and requires managers to actively assess and manage risks within their teams.

The Government have committed significant further investment in the resilience and security of HMRC’s systems, including funding announced at the spending review to modernise IT and data infrastructure.

I am happy with HMRC’s progress against the report’s findings, but I was disappointed that three recommendations made by HMICFRS in 2012 were not acted on at the time. This included assigning a member of HMRC’s executive committee to lead this vital work, which has now happened.

While the report highlights areas where improvements were needed, it also demonstrates that HMRC is effective at identifying and addressing insider risk. The Department has already acted on the vast majority of recommendations and has gone further in strengthening its approach.

HMRC employs around 70,000 staff, the vast majority of whom act with integrity and professionalism. The public can be confident that HMRC will continue to take robust action to protect taxpayers’ data and ensure that those who abuse their position are held to account.

[HCWS265]

Last night I delivered my annual speech at the financial and professional services dinner at Mansion House.

In my speech, I announced a package of further reforms to unlock investment across the country, increase access to finance for growing businesses, and position the UK at the forefront of financial innovation.

The Government welcomed the outcomes of the Financial Policy Committee’s bank capital review, including reforms to the leverage framework and capital buffers that support lending while maintaining resilience. It has also published consultations on ringfencing reforms, including a new growth allowance for ringfenced banks that could unlock up to £80 billion of financing for UK businesses, as announced in May. The Government have also welcomed new figures from the Association of British Insurers showing that UK life insurers have invested £16.8 billion in UK productive assets between 2024 and the end of the first half of 2025, putting the sector on track to meet its pledge to invest £100 billion in UK productive assets over 10 years.

The Government have expanded the growth guarantee scheme to facilitate around £3.35 billion of small and medium-sized enterprise lending per year by 2028-29. They also confirm that they will make up to £500 million of British Business Bank ENABLE Guarantee capacity available for lending to innovative and intellectual property-rich firms; and have announced a new UK Export Finance guarantee product, delivered in partnership with the British Business Bank, to support smaller businesses that are exporting or looking to begin exporting. It is also building on nearly £120 million already committed through the British Business Bank’s community ENABLE funding programme, with a new ambition to scale the programme to at least £500 million over the next five years.

The wholesale digital markets champion, Chris Woolard CBE, has published his first report on tokenisation, which will help to drive a cross-sectoral approach to digitalising UK markets. The Government have confirmed their intention to issue the first digital gilt instrument no later than the first quarter of 2027, and intend to prepare for potential further issuances, subject to the success of the first transaction. The Bank of England has approved the first firm to undertake live activity in the digital securities sandbox, and the dematerialisation market action taskforce has published its implementation plan for removing paper shares by the end of 2027. The Government have also set out progress on crypto asset and stablecoin regulation, including final rules from the Bank of England and Financial Conduct Authority, and have published updates to tax rules to facilitate the use of stablecoins and certain crypto asset loans and liquidity pools. The Government have published a consultation on modernising payment services regulation, and welcomed the financial services AI adoption plan, authored by the financial services AI champions—Harriet Rees and Dr Rohit Dhawan—which sets out practical recommendations to accelerate safe and responsible AI adoption across the sector. Finally, the Government have committed to consult on an open finance regulatory framework in 2027, focused on small and medium-sized enterprise lending.

We are building on the UK’s global strength through deeper international partnerships and improved market access. This includes increased regulatory co-operation with the European Union on financial services, focused on improving oversight and reducing burdens for firms in areas such as transaction reporting, and working together on emerging challenges such as the green and digital transitions. The joint UK and United States transatlantic taskforce for markets of the future has committed to publishing its report, which sets out recommendations to advance UK-US financial services collaboration, focusing on digital assets and capital markets. This sits alongside wider progress on financial services agreements and engagement with partners including Switzerland, India, the Republic of Korea, the Gulf Co-operation Council and China.

The Government have published “One Year On: Delivering the Financial Services Growth and Competitiveness Strategy”, which draws together progress in the last year across all six themes of the strategy, and demonstrates the impact those reforms are having.

Together, these reforms will unlock more investment, improve access to finance for growing businesses, support innovation and strengthen the UK’s position as a leading global financial centre.

The full list of the measures launched at Mansion House, along with supporting technical documents, can be found at

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/mansion-house-2026

[HCWS257]

Radio continues to be a strong and highly valued medium in the UK, with 87% of the population tuning in every week. However, the means by which listeners tune into radio has undergone a significant shift in recent years. In particular, there has been sustained growth in listeners’ use of voice-activated devices (such as smart speakers) to access online streams of live broadcast radio. The use of these kinds of devices by radio listeners has grown strongly. According to the most recent figures from RAJAR, 18% of total radio listening is via a voice-assisted device.

In response to these changes, the Media Act 2024 amended the Communications Act 2003 to introduce new powers to protect the availability and carriage of online streams of UK broadcast radio on such voice-activated services (defined as radio selection services or RSS.) These protections were put in place to ensure that listeners using these services as designated by the Secretary of State are able to continue to access live radio. Before making any such designation the Secretary of State must first receive a report from Ofcom, which the Secretary of State received on 19 March 2026.

Having taken into account Ofcom’s advice and recommendations, the Secretary of State agrees with Ofcom’s conclusion that 700,000 users is the appropriate threshold for designation. Consequently, the Secretary of State is minded to agree that Amazon’s Alexa, Google Assistant, and Apple’s Siri should all be designated radio selection services.

Before making regulations to designate these services, and having already received Ofcom’s report, the Secretary of State is now required by section 362BB of the Communications Act 2003 to consult persons who appear to represent providers of radio selection services and providers of internet radio services, and other appropriate persons.

This consultation launches today and responses can be submitted by the closing date of 9 September 2026.

[HCWS271]

The Enterprise Act 2002 (Mergers Involving Newspaper Enterprises and Foreign Powers) (No. 2) Regulations 2025, which can be found at www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2025/1351/made, were debated and approved by Parliament in December 2025, and came into force on 31 January 2026.

They amended the exceptions for state-owned investors in the foreign state influence regime in the Enterprise Act 2002 to provide that, if a state-owned investor acquires a direct holding of more than 5% of the shares or voting rights in a newspaper—up to a maximum of 15%—they must notify the Secretary of State and publish certain details on a website before the end of a period of 14 days beginning with the date of the relevant acquisition in order to qualify for the exception.

When the regulations were laid before Parliament, I made a written statement, which can be found at https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-statements/detail/2025-10-30/hcws1009 that set out the Secretary of State’s commitment to sharing a statement every six months on the details that state-owned investors have published about their investments pursuant to the regulations.

Since 31 January 2026, the Secretary of State has received no notifications of acquisitions resulting in a state-owned investor holding more than 5% in a UK newspaper directly.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport will continue to publish statements every six months to maintain transparency around state-owned investment in newspapers, and to build public and parliamentary confidence in this regime. The next statement is due in January 2027.

[HCWS252]

I am repeating the following written ministerial statement made today in the other place by my noble Friend, the Minister for Museums, Heritage and Gambling and Department for Culture, Media and Sport Lords Minister, Baroness Twycross:

I am pleased to inform the House that we have today published a consultation on banning unlicensed gambling sponsorship and advertising in sport and all other sectors. This follows our announcement in February of our intention to consult on banning such sponsorship in the sport sector.

Under current legislation, businesses are able to enter into advertising and sponsorship arrangements with gambling operators that are not licensed by the Gambling Commission, so long as those operators’ services cannot be accessed by consumers in Great Britain. Unlicensed operators achieve this by geo-blocking their websites. However, this can be circumvented by consumers using a virtual private network. This has become a particular issue over the past year in the sporting sector, particularly football, as the result of changes in the advertising landscape.

We therefore intend to introduce a ban on unlicensed gambling sponsorship and advertising that will target any physical forms or manifestations of advertising or sponsorship. Within a sporting context, this will include kit and equipment sponsorships, pitchside billboards, tournament programmes, venue infrastructure, and the naming of events, leagues and venues. This will make it a criminal offence for any club, league, event, venue, individual or related assets to advertise or be sponsored by a gambling operator not licensed by the Gambling Commission when operating in Great Britain. We also intend to apply this ban to all sectors, to avoid other sectors replacing sport as an alternative vehicle for unlicensed sponsorship.

Our rationale for change is driven by three core objectives:

to protect consumers, especially young people and those who are vulnerable, from unregulated platforms that may not offer adequate player protections or fraud recourse;

to defend the integrity of our domestic market by ensuring that advertising footprints are exclusive to operators who are required to adhere to the Gambling Commission’s licence conditions and codes of practice; and

in the sport sector, to eliminate severe money-laundering vulnerabilities within football clubs and agents that have been explicitly flagged within our national risk assessment.

We believe that although most sectors and sports will be unaffected, some sports or clubs will be impacted. For example, a number of football clubs have or have had sponsorship deals with gambling operators that do not hold a licence to operate in Great Britain. Nevertheless, we want to introduce this ban as quickly as possible. In recognition that football is the primary source of unlicensed gambling sponsorships and advertising, our preferred option is to implement this ban from a fixed date in August 2027, ahead of the 2027-28 football season. This should minimise commercial disruption and allow time to secure legitimate replacements.

I would encourage those in this House who are interested in gambling and sport policy, as well as relevant stakeholders, to share their views through this consultation. I will deposit a copy of the consultation in the Library of each House.

[HCWS255]

As we approach the 75th anniversary of the UK becoming a nuclear power, the contribution of over 22,000 UK service personnel, as well as scientists and civilians, in developing our nuclear deterrent must never be forgotten. I would like to place on record how grateful this Government are to those individuals for the critical role they played in the security of our nation.

Today I am updating the House on the findings of a major records exercise undertaken by the Ministry of Defence. This work has sought to address concerns raised by some in the nuclear test veteran community on gaps in their medical records.

I would first like to thank the community for their patience while this records exercise has been undertaken. The publication of its findings reflects this Government’s clear commitment to transparency and follows regular ministerial engagement with nuclear test veterans and the organisations that represent them. We have been keen to ensure that the exercise was conducted with thoroughness and care, and that its findings are as comprehensive as possible. This has required considerable work and therefore taken time to complete.

Records have been reviewed across the Department, including those held by the single services historical branches and AWE Nuclear Security Technologies. This has been a complex undertaking, noting the passage of time and cohering information, from a myriad of different departments and departmental reorganisations, since nuclear testing took place. The modern Ministry of Defence was established in 1964, some 12 years after testing began, which I appreciate has caused issues of trust in historical information storage. I know that we have lost veterans since its commissioning, and I would like to take this opportunity to pay my respects to them.

This significant exercise examined: the policy of blood and urine testing between 1952 and 1967; information captured about the blood and urine testing; and if the records did exist, to determine what happened to them.

Evidence indicates medical examinations or blood testing were required for the majority, if not all, of the nuclear testing period and applied to all three services. I refer to both, as when medical examinations are mentioned, it is not always explicit whether this included blood testing, or more specifically blood counts, but for the most part blood tests or blood counts are mentioned when the details of medical examinations are outlined. Evidence indicates blood testing was used pre-deployment to assess fitness to work and to establish a baseline for future comparison in the event of suspected radiation exposure. No evidence was found to suggest an overall policy for urine testing.

Compliance with policies on blood testing is evident in some surviving documentation in veterans’ records. However, the exercise confirmed that some blood testing records are indeed absent. This is likely to be due to historical policy and practices and is consistent with the condition of other personnel and medical records from the time of those not involved in nuclear tests.

It is important to state that the exercise identified some cases where testing should have taken place but did not, or where records were destroyed through administrative error. I acknowledge that, for veterans and their descendants seeking and viewing medical records, the picture therefore appears complex and inconsistent and that the content of their records will vary depending on the individual, their service and their deployment history. The exercise found no evidence of intentional concealment of medical records.

I am placing a copy of the following documents in the Library of the House and publishing them on www.gov.uk:

Records exercise into blood and urine testing of UK service personnel during the UK’s nuclear testing programme,1952 to-1967;

Army historical branch report on nuclear testing medical policy;

Navy historical branch report on nuclear testing medical policy;

Air historical branch report on nuclear testing medical policy;

AWE Nuclear Security Technologies report on nuclear testing medical policy.

My predecessor promised on 25 March 2026 to update the House in response to questions raised about a draft document released under an environmental information regulations request, entitled “Review of environmental monitoring data for Christmas Island (Cl) 1957-1958 (AWE 1)”.

Officials were asked to investigate the circumstances of the drafting of AWE 1 and the actions that were taken at the time. An extensive search of systems was undertaken. This work has established the facts around the document. It has been identified that AWE 1 was self-initiated by two AWE employees. They discovered some additional contemporaneous data that did not appear to have been included in the 1993 Clare report, which summarised the environmental monitoring programme for the nuclear tests on Christmas Island. AWE 1 was never finalised and remains a draft document.

Within Government, the release of draft documents will always create a challenge. We strive to maintain rigorous standards in the work which the Department publishes and acknowledge that the release of incomplete or draft documents without appropriate context, as in this case, may cause unnecessary confusion in relation to an already complex topic. We will learn from this.

AWE 1 was developed in isolation and without the rigorous checking required for a scientific report. It suggested that the data recordings on the island showed a minor increase in levels of radiation, but that it could not be determined at the time whether the increase was due to a natural anomaly or the result of the nuclear tests. The Clare report had already found there had been

“very localised and just measurable, but radiologically insignificant, fall-out activity”

and the authors of AWE 1 acknowledged that the fallout they identified was still too low to have caused health impacts.

AWE 1 was developed without the knowledge of MOD officials, who became aware of it in late 2014. We have found no evidence of Ministers being made aware of AWE 1 until December 2025. In January 2015, MOD officials requested to see the document and the Treasury Solicitor’s Department commissioned an expert technical review—peer review 1—which was received on 2 March 2015. It identified shortcomings with the analysis of the evidence, and completely rejected the contention and conclusions in AWE 1 that there had been material fallout on Christmas Island as a result of Grapple X. Separately, it came to light that AWE 1 had been reviewed by another AWE employee in early 2015, at the request of a local manager; that document is referred to as AWE 2.

In the 2016 final war pension litigation, new evidence—MOD report 1—was submitted that negated the exclusive reliance on measurements-based reports, such as the Clare report, and the relevance of AWE 1 and AWE 2. The tribunal considered the new evidence which took into account the nature of the war pension scheme’s standard of proof, and which assumed that, for the sake of argument, fallout had occurred at Christmas Island after every detonation. The MOD report 1 data modelled hypothetical individualised dose assessments calculated for each claimant on this basis. It is important to note that the tribunal also considered expert medical evidence and concluded in all but one case that either the level of radiation exposure was not sufficient to have caused the claimed condition, or that they were not caused by radiation at all. After the hearings before the 2016 tribunal, the author of MOD report 1 updated the report’s findings in MOD report 2 and submitted this report to the tribunal, which it took into account before coming to its final decision.

Today in the spirit of transparency, I am placing in the Library of the House a copy of AWE 1 and the five additional documents that were identified during the recent programme of work, which provide context around AWE 1. I am also placing in the Library of the House a copy of a narrative report on these documents, which provides further context.

AWE 1 document—Ionising Radiation Appeals—Review of environmental Review of environmental monitoring data for Christmas Island (Cl) 1957-1958.

AWE 2 document—Review of SDTN No. 16/93: Environmental Monitoring Data for Christmas Island 1957-58.

Peer review 1—Ionising Radiation Appeals: Review of environmental monitoring data for Christmas Island 1957-58 —Undated and un-reference draft AWE report. Review and Comments by K. Johnston.

Peer review 2—Review of SDTN No 16/93—Note by K Johnston.

MOD report 1—Reconstruction of doses received by Veterans of the UK Atmospheric Nuclear Weapons Tests at Kiritimati—Christmas Island.

MOD report 2—Supplementary Report: Revision of Estimates of Dose to Include Additional Nuclides, Uranium 240, Neptunium 240 and Plutonium 240.

Narrative report on documents relating to environmental monitoring data at Christmas Island during the UK nuclear testing programme.

I once again offer my personal gratitude to nuclear test veterans, their families and the organisations that represent them for their patience and engagement throughout this work. I hope that the documents released today provide the clarity they have been seeking for so long, and I am committed to continuing to operate under the principle of transparency in the future.

[HCWS263]

I am today announcing that the Ministry of Defence has completed the purchase of Finnart oil terminal, representing a multimillion-pound investment in the west of Scotland.

This is a strategically important investment that strengthens the United Kingdom’s national security, reinforces our energy resilience, and underpins the operational effectiveness of the Royal Navy.

At a time of heightened global uncertainty—including instability in the middle east and increasing Russian aggression—this acquisition ensures that the Royal Navy can sustain operations in the north Atlantic and remain ready to respond to current and future threats. It increases the Royal Navy’s operational reach and secures a reliable fuel supply.

Crucially, this investment strengthens sovereign control over critical energy infrastructure while expanding the UK’s defence footprint in the region—directly supporting our NATO-first approach and our commitment to collective defence.

Finnart will play a vital role in ensuring that the United Kingdom is warfighting-ready. By expanding our fuel storage capacity, we are enhancing the resilience and endurance of our naval forces, in line with the First Sea Lord’s warfighting readiness plan.

The investment also delivers tangible benefits for the west of Scotland. As activity increases, the Finnart oil terminal will support a broader ecosystem of employment and skills development in local communities, while strengthening supply chains.

The Finnart oil terminal will be owned by the Ministry of Defence and managed by the Oil and Pipelines Agency, which has a strong track record of operating fuel infrastructure safely and securely across the defence estate. The site will continue to meet the highest regulatory and safety standards, ensuring reliable, robust support to the Royal Navy’s operational requirements.

This investment in the Finnart site will form part of the Clyde transformation programme—a multi-decade, multibillion-pound programme to regenerate HM Naval Base Clyde. Together with our broader investments in Scotland, including Project Royal Oak and the defence growth deal, this demonstrates the Government’s commitment to strengthening national security, supporting defence as an engine for growth, and investing in communities across the United Kingdom.

[HCWS247]

Victoria Marten’s death was tragic and the direct result of the actions of her parents, who are now serving sentences for her negligent manslaughter. Victoria’s death prompted a wider national review and in February 2026, the Child Safeguarding Practice Review Panel published its national review, “Protecting all vulnerable babies better”. This examined the safeguarding issues raised by the death of Victoria and a further 41 serious cases of harm and death involving babies.

At the time of publication, I committed to providing a full Government response to the panel’s eight national recommendations by summer 2026. Today, I am laying before the House, “Protecting all vulnerable babies better: a Government response” which sets out how the Government are strengthening the protection of babies where there are safeguarding concerns, and responding to issues identified by the panel.

Babies are among the most vulnerable members of our society, reliant on their caregivers, fragile, unable to talk and often unknown to many services. The panel’s review reinforced the importance of earlier identification of risk, effective information sharing, professional curiosity, and sustained multi-agency engagement with families, particularly during pregnancy and the first years of life. It also highlighted the need for greater national consistency in safeguarding practice and stronger support for families where risks are complex and cumulative.

The Government’s response brings together action across adult and children’s social care, health, policing, justice, housing and wider public services. It builds on the most significant reform to children’s social care in a generation through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 and delivers against this Government’s commitment to keep families together and children safe, to intervene earlier where children are at risk, and to strengthen child protection so that vulnerable children do not fall through the cracks.

Since the publication of the panel’s review, the appalling death of Preston Davey has been a further reminder that we can never be complacent in our efforts to protect babies. An independent local child safeguarding practice review is under way, and it would be inappropriate to pre-empt its findings. We will consider the findings carefully and incorporate any relevant lessons into the delivery of this response and wider safeguarding reforms.

The response is structured around four objectives:

Preventing babies dying by identifying and responding earlier to risk;

Reducing the number of babies entering care by preventing repeat removals and strengthening family support;

Building the evidence base on effective and promising practice; and

Facilitating consistency in national guidance on babies and pre-birth support for pregnant women in safeguarding and child protection.

The death of Victoria Marten remains a stark reminder of what is at stake. This response reflects extensive Government collaboration and demonstrates our collective commitment to learning from the panel’s review, and turning that learning into meaningful and lasting change. Delivery will be overseen through ongoing cross-Government arrangements, including the Keeping Children Safe ministerial board, to ensure accountability and sustained progress.

I will deposit a copy of “Protecting all vulnerable babies better: a Government response” in the Library of each House.

[HCWS253]

My noble Friend Lord Vallance of Balham, Minister of State for Science, Research and Innovation, has today made the following statement:

The final investment decision (FID) for Sizewell C, announced on 22 July 2025 stands as the UK’s most significant public investment in clean, homegrown energy this century. The deal represented the best outcome for consumers and for taxpayers, combining lower-cost Government finance with investment from third parties, each with valuable experience in delivering and managing complex infrastructure projects.

In the summary business case for the project, which is available here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sizewell-c-project-summary-business-case the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero committed to providing Parliament with an annual update on the project’s progress. Alongside this, in line with reporting obligations under Managing Public Money, I am also notifying the House of the publication of Sizewell C Ltd’s annual report and accounts (ARA) for the 2025-26 financial year.

The Government welcome the progress Sizewell C Ltd has made in the last year.

There are now over 2,000 people on the Sizewell C construction site each day. Sizewell C Ltd also reports that the project has spent £4.89 billion with more than 1,000 UK suppliers, including £1.35 billion across the east of England alone, demonstrating the benefits of the project to both national and local economies. The project has also created 120 apprenticeships to date, with 80 of these for people from Suffolk. With plans to create 1,500 apprenticeships across the construction period, the project will be invaluable to ensuring the UK has the skills and capabilities needed to support future projects, as part of the Government’s vision for a new golden age of nuclear power.

Departmental annual update

Since FID and reaching financial close, the Department’s priority has been supporting successful delivery of the project across the Government’s roles as shareholder, policy sponsor and provider of the Government support package (GSP), and debt provider (with the Government’s debt finance to the project managed and administered by the National Wealth Fund).

As shareholder, the Department has been working alongside private sector investors to help ensure the project remains on track while maintaining effective governance and oversight.

As policy sponsor, the Department has supported Sizewell C’s engagement with other Government Departments and bodies, for instance with Defra and the Environment Agency on the launch of a lead environmental regulator pilot programme, which is being tested on a variety of major infrastructure projects including Sizewell C. Encouraging collaboration between developers, regulators and other partners is a key part of delivering the Government’s agenda for growth, by helping to streamline construction and keeping major projects on track.

Looking ahead, following the identification of Sizewell C as a megaproject by the Office for Value for Money, in the coming months the Department will lay a strategy and delivery plan (SDP) for Sizewell C as a Command Paper and publish it on gov.uk.

Sizewell C Ltd annual report and accounts

On 6 July 2026, Sizewell C Ltd published its ARA (which is available here: https://www.sizewellc.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/Annual-Report-2025-26.pdf. The ARA provides a comprehensive account of the company’s activities during 2025-26, recording a year of major milestones for the project, including the expansion of construction activity on site, growth in the workforce, and continued development of the project’s delivery arrangements. It also provides updates on the project’s strategic priorities looking ahead, project finances, governance arrangements, and its approach to managing delivery risks and opportunities.

The project has already completed important local road and rail upgrades, and is delivering on its construction milestones, including first aggregate deliveries by train, progress on the beach landing facility, work on the temporary sea defence and cut-off wall to enable bulk excavation for the power station’s foundations.

The Department will continue to publish annual updates on the project in conjunction with Sizewell C Ltd’s annual report and accounts.

[HCWS258]

I wish to update the House on the action I have taken with the support of the Forestry Commission and DEFRA officials to cut the backlog of restocking notice appeals and to build a faster appeals process that protects nature and growth.

This Government are committed to expanding, protecting and improving England’s trees, woodlands and forests. We are investing more than £1 billion in trees over this Parliament to support nature recovery, climate resilience, local communities and economic growth. This includes creating three new national forests. To support this effort, it is vital that our existing trees are looked after.

In instances of unauthorised tree felling, the Forestry Commission issues restocking notices, which require trees to be replaced. This gives local communities confidence that illegal felling will not go unchecked.

In 2024, when I took on responsibility for restocking notice appeals, I inherited a backlog dating back as far as 2018. When appeals are delayed, this affects nature restoration, can lead to costly appeals and impacts growth where development is inhibited.

I have taken steps eliminate the backlog while improving the appeals process so it never happens again. I am taking action across three fronts: cutting the backlog, reducing the number of new appeals, and streamlining the process to avoid the risk of a backlog.

Cutting the backlog

We are doubling the number of appeal hearings held each month by booking hearings in blocks by geographical location and introducing hybrid—in-person and remote-attendance—hearings. The first month of block-booked hearings has been a success. I am almost doubling the pool of independent panellists hearing appeals to support this increased capacity.

Reducing the number of appeals

I am working across Government to increase public awareness of tree felling legislation. Local authorities and local partners play a key role in giving early advice to developers and landowners, making clear that trees should not be felled without a felling licence, if required. I have used established planning and local government channels to reinforce this message. This will help prevent unlawful felling, reduce avoidable appeals and support responsible development.

The Forestry Commission is now undertaking stronger engagement with landowners before a restocking notice is served. This helps deliver a more proportionate approach and ensures that much earlier resolution is achieved where possible—before a restocking notice is issued.

Streamlining the process

I am streamlining the process by increasing automation of administrative processes, making better use of digital resources and speeding up decision making. I will issue new public guidance this summer to explain how individuals or organisations can appeal a restocking notice and what they can expect at the appeal hearing. This will provide much needed clarity for potential appellants.

Together, these changes are moving us from a slow, reactive approach prone to legal challenge to a more proactive and efficient one, with greater certainty for appellants. This will mean more is done to resolve cases before proceeding to restocking notices, and that where restocking notices are issued and appealed, appeals are resolved quickly.

The appeals process is now in a much better state. These changes have resolved long-running cases and gripped an overburdened process, with the time taken falling from six years to under two years. These improvements are delivering for both nature and growth.

[HCWS259]

The Government are pleased to provide an update to the House on the UK-EU treaty in respect of Gibraltar. The treaty was signed in Brussels yesterday, 14 July, and laid before Parliament for scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010. I signed on behalf of the UK, and Maroš Šefčovič, Commissioner for Trade and Economic Security, signed on behalf of the EU. The ceremony was also attended by the Spanish Foreign Minister, José Manuel Albares, and the Chief Minister of Gibraltar, Fabian Picardo.

This treaty resolves one of the last outstanding issues from Brexit, by creating a framework for Gibraltar’s relationship with the EU. It establishes a fluid border between Gibraltar and Spain, providing the people of Gibraltar and the region with much-needed legal certainty and stability, and securing their prosperity. It safeguards the operational autonomy of our military facilities, ensuring that they can continue their vital contribution to regional security without interference or interruption. And it protects UK sovereignty over Gibraltar, with a clause which makes explicitly clear that nothing in the treaty can be used to challenge our sovereignty position.

The Treaty is being provisionally applied from 15 July, providing certainty for the people and economy of Gibraltar. His Majesty’s Government of Gibraltar has prepared the necessary legislative, operational and infrastructure changes to enable the new arrangements to begin on 15 July.

The scrutiny process will be led by the European Affairs Committee.

[HCWS260]

I am today updating the House on the Government’s progress in responding to the recommendations of the independent inquiry into the serious issues arising from the appalling actions of David Fuller. The inquiry’s final report, published on 15 July 2025, made 75 recommendations to strengthen the security and dignity of people after death across a wide range of settings. As the House will recall, it found that arrangements for the care of the deceased were partial, piecemeal and not universally mandated.

To mark one year since publication, I am providing a further update on progress since the Government’s interim update of 16 December 2025. The Government have worked with NHS England, the Human Tissue Authority, the Local Government Association and other partners, through a dedicated cross-Government programme board, to consider each recommendation and determine the action required.

At this time, the Government have accepted in full the majority of Sir Jonathan Michael’s recommendations and are already taking forward a substantial programme of work to address the issues raised.

Significant progress has been made to address the recommendations for NHS Hospitals. NHS England has worked to agree actions at NHS board level to strengthen mortuary security across the NHS estate, alongside wider work to strengthen governance, accountability and safeguarding arrangements. NHS England has also issued a national system letter setting out the actions expected of each NHS trust and providers to ensure that improvements are delivered consistently.

There are a further group of recommendations where the Government agree with the intent and direction of travel, but where further consideration is needed before implementation can proceed as stated in the inquiry’s report. These recommendations affect a range of organisations and settings, each with different operational requirements and regulatory arrangements. We are therefore undertaking further work to understand the practical implications, costs and benefits, and to ensure that any changes are proportionate, effective and deliverable. This includes working with local authorities to support closer alignment with Human Tissue Authority standards on security, governance and audit.

Some of these recommendations relate to the wider regulation of sectors involved in caring for the deceased outside the NHS, including the funeral sector. These raise broader questions about the most appropriate regulatory framework and the potential impact on businesses, local authorities and others providing these important services. The Government are carefully considering these issues to ensure that any future changes improve standards and oversight while remaining proportionate and sustainable. We recognise the significance of these issues and will update the House as soon as practicably possible on how we intend to take these recommendations forward.

Throughout this work, the Government remain committed to improving standards and oversight of care for the deceased and ensuring that bereaved families can have confidence that their loved ones will be treated with dignity, respect and compassion, regardless of the setting in which care is provided. This work also sits alongside action being taken in response to the horrific, recent findings from the independent review of maternity services at Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, which have further highlighted the importance of robust governance, oversight and respectful care for the deceased. Immediate action has been taken by the Human Tissue Authority who has instructed all mortuaries to review internal records over the last 10 years to ensure all incidents have been logged and reported. The findings of this exercise will be reported to Ministers by 16 October 2026.

The Government remain committed to providing a full response to Sir Jonathan Michael’s report once the leadership election period for Prime Minister has concluded. None the less, it is important that the House is updated on the progress made to date while further work continues across Government and with delivery partners.

Progress will continue to be monitored, where possible, through the Cabinet Office’s www.gov.uk record of recommendations made by public inquiries since 2024. The Public Inquiries: Recommendations and Government Response dashboard can be accessed at: https://finquiry.dac.grid.civilservice.gov.uk

I thank all those who contributed evidence to the inquiry, and in particular the families whose experiences informed this work. The Government remain committed to learning the lessons of these events and ensuring that care for the deceased is consistent across all settings.

[HCWS261]

My noble Friend the Minister of State at the Home Office, Lord Hanson of Flint, has today made the following written ministerial statement:

Today the Government are launching two calls for evidence to strengthen the evidence base on two key and evolving fraud threats: unauthorised fraud and misuse of telephone numbers.

Fraud is now the most commonly experienced crime in England and Wales, accounting for around 46% of offences against individuals and costing an estimated £14.4 billion each year. It funds organised crime, erodes trust and harms millions.

That is why in March the Government published a new fraud strategy, which sets out a comprehensive approach to prevent fraud, protect the public and pursue offenders.

The strategy committed to improving the evidence base in relation to unauthorised fraud and anonymous access in the telecoms sector by launching calls for evidence. Strengthening the evidence base on key and evolving threats is key to ensuring that our response continues to evolve and is targeted, proportionate and effective.

That is why today the Home Office is launching two calls for evidence.

First, we are launching a call for evidence on unauthorised fraud. This form of fraud, where criminals act without a victim’s knowledge or consent, is increasing in scale and sophistication, driven by rapid technological change and the growth of the digital economy. This call for evidence will gather data and insight on the scale, drivers and enablers of unauthorised fraud to inform future policy and ensure our response keeps pace with emerging threats.

Secondly, we are launching a call for evidence on anonymous access to phone numbers and call routing for fraud. Telecommunications is a key vector exploited by fraudsters, and the strategy therefore commits us to several actions to identify and address vulnerabilities across the telecoms ecosystem. This exercise will help us better understand risks in the numbering system and consider whether targeted and proportionate interventions are needed.

We are calling on industry, law enforcement, regulators and the public to contribute. The evidence gathered will shape the next phase of our work to disrupt criminals, protect the public and strengthen the UK’s resilience to fraud.

Both calls for evidence have been published today on gov.uk and will be open for responses for 12 weeks.

[HCWS251]

The 12th report of the National Crime Agency Remuneration Review Body is being laid before Parliament and published today. The NCARRB report advises the Government on the pay and allowances for National Crime Agency officers with operational powers and considers the whole NCA workforce.

I would like to thank the Chair and members of the review body for their work on gathering evidence from the NCA, the Home Office, His Majesty’s Treasury and the trade unions, resulting in their detailed, comprehensive report. The Government value the independent expertise and insight of NCARRB and take on board the useful advice and principles set out in response to our remit letter of 27 October 2025.

The NCA is a leader in the fight against serious and organised crime, supporting law enforcement partners with its specialist capabilities and focusing on the highest harm offenders, groups and networks which pose the greatest threat to our society. It is a key operational partner in delivering our priorities for organised immigration crime, working in support of the Border Security Command. It is providing national leadership in tackling grooming gangs, making our streets safer and protecting the economy by tackling money laundering and fraud.

The Government are committed to ensuring that the NCA continues to develop and evolve in response to the rapidly evolving and complex nature of serious and organised crime. Part of this transformation includes empowering the agency’s ability to attract, recruit and retain the skilled workforce it needs.

The NCARRB’s 12th report made the following recommendations:

A consolidated pay award of 4.7% for all NCA officers within our remit group. The spot rates for grades 1 to 5 and the minima and maxima of the standard pay ranges for grades 1 to 6 should be raised by 4.7%.

An increase of 4.7%, in line with the pay award, to the London Weighting Allowance and South-East Allowance for all NCA officers within our remit group.

The NCA undertakes a review of the purpose, design and uprating mechanisms of the London Weighting Allowance and the South-East Allowance. In parallel, the NCA should work with policing partners and trade unions to consider the long-term future of these allowances in the light of the wider reforms set out in the Police Reform White Paper and the NCA’s transition to the National Police Service.

An increase of 4.7%, in line with the pay award, to the International Liaison Officer Allowance and the Diplomatic Compensation Allowance for officers in our remit group.

After careful consideration, I have decided to take the following approach:

Fully accept recommendation 3, which will deliver increases to NCA allowances.

An increase of 3.8%, in line with the proposed pay award for the NCA, to the London Weighting Allowance and South-East Allowance for all NCA officers within our remit group.

An increase of 3.8%, in line with the proposed pay award for the NCA, to the International Liaison Officer Allowance and Diplomatic Compensation Allowance for officers in our remit group.

A pay award of 3.8% is proposed for the NCA. This baseline award will be complemented with the approval of pay and contract reforms that the NCA will be able to take forward, including pay progression for its officers. Taken together this is an excellent outcome for the agency and is consistent with the NCARRB’s report. In particular, this step supports progressing the NCA’s transition to the future National Police Service as announced in the Government’s White Paper “From local to national: a new model for policing”.

In reaching these decisions, I have given due consideration to a number of factors including the value NCA officers give to the public by protecting them against the threat of serious and organised crime, affordability, and delivering value for the tax-paying public.

This award represents a significant increase, with this year’s 3.8% award building on last year’s increase of 4.5%. The award will be funded within the NCA’s existing budget, and I am confident it will greatly support the agency’s efforts to eradicate the most dangerous organised crime groups operating within and against the UK.

Alongside the pay award, the Government are approving the NCA’s pay and contract reform package. This will support the NCA’s transition towards the National Police Service by introducing conditional pay progression, further helping to narrow differences with policing.

[HCWS266]

The 12th report of the Police Remuneration Review Body is being laid before Parliament and published today. The body considered the pay and allowances for police officers in the federated and superintending ranks in England and Wales. The supplement to the 48th annual report of the Senior Salaries Review Body, which made recommendations on the pay and allowances for the chief police officer ranks in England and Wales, is also being laid before Parliament and published. I would like to thank the chairs and members for their reports and detailed considerations.

Police officers perform one of the most challenging and important roles in public service. Every day, they put themselves in harm’s way to keep our communities safe, protect vulnerable people, and uphold the rule of law. Through our police reform programme, we are committed to ensuring that officers have the support they need to carry out this vital role and to meet the demands of modern policing.

The PRRB recommended a consolidated increase of 3.9% for all ranks and pay points, up to and including chief superintendent. The SSRB recommended a consolidated increase of 3.7% for the chief officer ranks. The Government have given very careful consideration to the recommendations and have decided to award a consolidated increase of 3.5% to all ranks and pay points. This is the highest award that is manageable within existing police force and Home Office budgets, while enabling the continued delivery of the Government’s crime and policing priorities, and considering the evidence and findings of the PRRB and SSRB. This increase will take effect from 1 September 2026.

To support forces with the additional costs of the award, the Home Office will provide additional funding of £84 million in 2026-27; £144 million in 2027-28; and £145 million in 2028-29. I have always been clear that I will prioritise crucial frontline services and this funding has been made available through contingency budgets created by rigorous reprioritisation, difficult decisions and savings exercises undertaken during and after the spending review 2025. The funding will be allocated using police funding formula shares.

London weighting will be increased by 3.5% in line with the pay award. The maximum rates of London allowance and the south-east allowance will also be increased by 3.5%. All protection allowance rates will be increased by £8. These increases will take effect from 1 September 2026.

The PRRB recommended that the 10-day qualifying period for acting up allowance should be abolished from 1 September 2026. This recommendation has been accepted but will instead be implemented following consultation on amendments to determinations made under the Police Regulations 2003.

The PRRB further recommended that maternity support leave entitlements should be increased to two weeks with full pay from 1 September 2026. The second week of full pay will be available to those officers meeting the current service requirements to receive statutory paternity pay, as set out in determinations made under the Police Regulations 2003. The recommendation will also be applied to adoption support leave entitlements. Both changes will be implemented following consultation on amendments to the determinations.

The PRRB recommended that rate three of the protection allowance should be applied for each day an officer is deployed to a qualifying country. This recommendation will be subject to further discussion with all relevant stakeholders to fully understand the impact.

Further recommendations were also made on how statutory employment rights should be applied in the Police Regulations 2003. The Government note these recommendations but emphasise that the PRRB and SSRB will continue to have a role in advising on any enhancements beyond statutory minimum employment rights. In addition, the PRRB made recommendations on timescales for implementing outstanding changes required to the Police Regulations 2003 and determinations made under them. The Home Office will work with policing stakeholders to develop a realistic timetable for progressing these amendments.

The SSRB recommended that the Home Office and the National Police Chiefs’ Council work with policing stakeholders to develop a solution at pace to address chief officer retention through all stages of policing reform. The Home Office will consider how best to take this forward with the NPCC.

[HCWS264]

The leasehold system is blighting millions of lives. The leasehold system is a barrier to a fair and efficient modern residential property market. The leasehold system is an anachronism in the 21st century. That is why this Government made a clear and unambiguous commitment in their manifesto to act where previous Governments had failed and finally bring it to an end.

To bring the feudal leasehold system to an orderly end in this Parliament, we must stop it perpetuating itself. To do so, we will legislate through our forthcoming commonhold and leasehold reform Bill to reinvigorate commonhold through the introduction of a comprehensive new legal framework and make it the default tenure by banning the use of leasehold for new flats—complementing the ban on new leasehold houses already on the statute book.

In the commonhold future that is on the horizon, existing leaseholders will not be left behind. We will put in place measures that enable more existing leaseholders to take control of their buildings and more easily convert to commonhold as and when they judge the time is right for them. And we will continue to strengthen protections for existing leaseholders in the here and now.

Implementation of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 is an integral part of the Government’s ambitious leasehold and commonhold reform agenda. Bringing the various provisions of the Act into force is essential both to providing immediate relief to existing leaseholders currently suffering as a result of unfair and unreasonable practices and to facilitating a rapid reduction in the prevalence of existing leasehold by enabling leaseholders to convert to commonhold in practice.

The Government have already made significant progress when it comes to commencing provisions in the 2024 Act. On 24 July 2024, we brought into force provisions relating to rent charge arrears, building safety legal costs and the work of professional insolvency practitioners. On 31 October 2024, we brought into force further building safety measures. On 31 January 2025, we commenced provisions to remove the two-year qualifying rule in relation to enfranchisement and lease extensions. And on 3 March 2025, right to manage provisions (expanding access, reforming its costs, and voting rights) came into force.

Today, I am setting out details of the next phase of the 2024 Act’s implementation.

Leasehold enfranchisement: valuation rates and non-litigation (process) costs

Our forthcoming commonhold and leasehold reform Bill will include a new and improved process for commonhold conversion, one which brings it into line with wider enfranchisement processes and will make conversion possible if at least 50% of qualifying leaseholders agree.

However, to ensure more leaseholders are able to convert in practice, we need to implement measures in the 2024 Act that will make it easier and cheaper for leaseholders to extend their lease or buy their freehold (known as “enfranchisement”), as well as implement mandatory leasebacks, address development value as a barrier to enfranchisement, and legislate to cap ground rent at £250 which will further reduce the cost of enfranchisement for many leaseholders with ground rent.

We have been constrained from implementing the 2024 Act’s enfranchisement measures to date by the fact that legislation contains a small number of specific flaws. These include a loophole in the new valuation process which means that some people could avoid paying the correct price for their lease extension or freehold acquisition, thereby compromising the integrity of the amended method, and an omission that would deny tens of thousands of shared ownership leaseholders the right to extend their lease with their direct landlord, given that the providers in question do not have sufficiently long leases to grant 990-year extensions. The King’s Speech 2026 confirmed that fixes to these flaws will be included in the forthcoming commonhold and leasehold reform Bill.

To ensure that we can commence the 2024 Act’s enfranchisement provisions as soon as possible following Royal Assent of the commonhold and leasehold reform Bill, the Government need to have determined the prescribed rates that will be used to calculate the enfranchisement premium and to have confirmed their approach to the recovery of non-litigation (process) costs. To inform final decisions in respect of both matters, we are today launching two technical consultations.

The first consultation, which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/leasehold-enfranchisement-valuation-rates, concerns valuation rates. The new method for calculating the price of a statutory lease extension or freehold acquisition provided for by the 2024 Act removes the requirement for marriage value to be paid, caps the treatment of ground rents in the valuation calculation at 0.1% of the freehold value, and allows Government to prescribe through secondary legislation the two rates used to calculate the enfranchisement premium.

Within the parameters defined by the 2024 Act, the consultation seeks evidence and views to inform the setting of both the deferment and the capitalisation rates. Our aim is to set rates that reasonably find the present value of the “reversion” and “term” elements of the premium while providing simplicity, certainty and stability for those involved in enfranchisement claims.

The second consultation, which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/leasehold-enfranchisement-process-costs, concerns non-litigation (process) costs. At present, leaseholders are forced to pay their landlords’ process costs when extending their lease or buying their freehold. The 2024 Act ends the recovery of non-litigation costs by landlords with a small number of exceptions, as recommended by the Law Commission, to account for low-value claims, failed claims and where there are leaseback arrangements in place.

The consultation seeks evidence and views on the amount of the landlords’ process costs that should be payable by leaseholders where one of the exceptions in the 2024 Act applies and also on the merits of a new exemption (subject to future legislation) designed to support resident-led management organisations, and possibly some other organisations, which might otherwise be unable to fund the costs associated with an enfranchisement claim.

Both consultations will run for 10 weeks. While each is technically complex and demands a degree of specialist knowledge, we strongly encourage input from all parties affected, including individual leaseholders and freeholders, so that the Government’s final decisions on valuation rates and non-litigation (process) costs are informed by views beyond simply enfranchisement professionals.

I want to reiterate that no amount of litigation will deter the Government from progressing their ambitious leasehold and commonhold reform agenda. We robustly defended the challenges brought to the enfranchisement provisions of the 2024 Act last year and warmly welcomed the High Court’s judgment which comprehensively dismissed them. We will defend any appeals just as tenaciously.

Regulation of leasehold: service charges, litigation costs and insurance costs

The forthcoming commonhold and leasehold reform Bill will contain a number of provisions that provide existing leaseholders with greater rights, powers and protections over their homes, not least the abolition of leasehold forfeiture and its replacement with a modern, proportionate lease enforcement system that addresses breaches fairly, with appropriate safeguards and judicial oversight. However, providing urgent relief to existing leaseholders struggling with the cost of living requires us to switch on a number of remaining measures from the 2024 Act.

The “Strengthening leaseholder protections over charges and services” consultation undertaken last year sought views on measures contained in the 2024 Act to drive up the transparency of service charges and reform the litigation costs regime, as well as a number of further reforms outside the scope of that Act including mandating reserve funds, introducing mandatory qualifications for managing agents and improving the section 20 major works regime. We received a very large number of thoughtful and detailed responses to it from leaseholders, landlords, managing agents and representative organisations. The insight provided has been invaluable in shaping our approach.

Having considered carefully the feedback received to this consultation, as well as the separate consultation undertaken in respect of permitted insurance fees, we are today publishing a Government response to those proposals in the consultation relating to part 4 of the 2024 Act, which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/strengthening-leaseholder-protections-over-charges-and-services-consultation.

That response confirms that the Government will now proceed to implement measures to drive up the transparency of service charges, including standardised service charge demand forms, an annual report and enhanced leaseholder rights to obtain information on request, and reform the litigation costs regime by requiring court or tribunal approval for the recovery of litigation costs through the service charge and giving leaseholders a new right to enable them to recover landlord costs in certain circumstances. We will also look to introduce a transparent and fair permitted building insurance payment. These measures will work in tandem to help leaseholders better understand what they are paying for and empower them to challenge charges where they believe them to be unreasonable.

This impactful package of reforms will be laid in Parliament later this year through a minimum of five complementary statutory instruments, at least two of which will be made under the affirmative procedure. We will provide a separate response in due course in relation to the further reforms consulted upon that are outside the scope of the 2024 Act, including those that concern the regulation of managing agents.

[HCWS270]

At the local government finance settlement on 9 February 2026, the Government confirmed the £5 million internal drainage board levy support grant for the financial year 2026-27. This is a continuation of the grant from 2025-26, reflecting the Government’s recognition of the continued financial pressures special levies place on local authorities.

Today, I am confirming the allocation of this funding to the 17 local authorities most severely impacted by internal drainage board special levies. Councils and internal drainage boards are encouraged to continue working together to deliver services efficiently and ensure good value for money for the public.

[HCWS266]

This Government are committed to taking the action necessary to fix the foundations of local government. Today, I am updating the House on the Government’s action to update the best value guidance, to set clear expectations of the standards local authorities need to meet for their residents. I am also updating the House on the steps we are taking to support individual councils at risk to recover and reform.

Best Value Duty

In March, we published an independent evaluation of our best value interventions, and committed to updating the best value statutory guidance, previously issued in 2024. We are now publishing, for consultation, revised draft guidance that sets out what constitutes best value, the standards expected by Government, and the Government’s approach to supporting local government in delivering real prosperity for their residents and local area.

To achieve best value and meet the standard residents expect, we need strong local institutions that are well led, focused on the long term and committed to a culture of continuous improvement.

The revised guidance sets out this Government’s intention of supporting authorities to secure their own compliance with best value, prevent them from slipping into crisis, and take action to address risks before they escalate. It lays out a new focus on the high standards expected in local government. Where authorities are in crisis, the guidance explains how Government may intervene to get them back on their feet.

Following the closure of the consultation on 7 October 2026, Ministers will update the House when the Government publish the final statutory guidance.

Best Value Notices

I am also updating the House on the use of best value notices as a lever to secure improvement in several councils. Best value notices are not a form of statutory intervention, but provide a formal notification that Ministers have concerns about risks to compliance with the best value duty. They request that each council engages with the Department to provide assurance of improvement at pace against a set of expectations to avoid future failure.

Three councils had notices issued in 2025 that are due for review. Following significant improvements in Dudley metropolitan council, the notice there will be lifted on 16 July. The Department will continue to work with the council and its partners to ensure improvement is sustained and cultural change is embedded. Progress has also been made at the London borough of Newham. However, there is further work for the changing political and officer leadership team to deliver and embed planned improvements, and the Department has issued a revised notice, to be reviewed after six months. I remain very concerned about the scale of challenge at Cheshire East council, and the Department has issued a revised notice, to be reviewed after six months. I expect the council to significantly increase the pace of improvement, driven by a stable leadership team and supported by the Department and the Local Government Association.

The Department has also issued four new best value notices. In the London borough of Hillingdon, Shropshire council and Somerset council, my concerns relate to financial sustainability, as evidenced by prolonged and forecasted reliance on exceptional financial support, alongside broader issues including with financial management, governance and capacity. In Basildon borough council, my concerns relate to serious cultural and governance issues. To build the evidence base for improvement, I will also commission an independent external assurance review into Basildon, which will report its findings by the end of October 2026.

Woking and Spelthorne

Following consideration of local representations, I have established a single commissioner team to operate across both Woking and Spelthorne borough councils. This creates a single, cross-cutting team that will focus on embedding council improvements and strengthening the grip on the complex challenges that remain as the councils approach West Surrey’s vesting day in April 2027. The team is led by Lesley Seary, supported by Barry Scarr, Deborah McLaughlin and Mervyn Greer.

As part of these changes, Sir Tony Redmond and Peter Robinson have stepped down from their commissioner roles. Richard Carr will also transition from his managing director commissioner role, and will continue playing an important part in supporting Woking borough council's improvement and transition towards local government reorganisation as its interim chief executive. I would like to place on record my sincere thanks to all three commissioners for their significant contributions.

I have also received the latest commissioner reports for both councils and published them, together with my formal responses, on gov.uk.

Thurrock

On 27 January 2026, I announced that I was content for Thurrock council to initiate a recruitment process for a chief executive. I understand that the recruitment process is on schedule, with an appointment due to be recommended to full council later this month. As Parliament will be in recess at that time, and having considered local representations, I am announcing today that if the council successfully appoints a chief executive, and the managing director commissioner subsequently steps away from their role, I will appoint a commissioner with responsibility for transformation in due course. This will ensure that there continues to be three commissioners in place in Thurrock to provide the necessary oversight, challenge and support as the council moves into the next phase of its intervention and recovery.

Slough

Following the managing director commissioner setting out his plans to step down at Slough borough council over the summer period, and having considered local representations, I am today announcing that I will appoint a replacement managing director commissioner with the expertise and leadership needed to address the scale of its ongoing challenges. Given that Dr Dave Smith’s role will end at Thurrock with the appointment of a chief executive, I am announcing that he will be appointed as managing director commissioner at Slough borough council.

I would like to take this opportunity extend my sincere thanks for all the work Will Tuckley has done as managing director commissioner for the intervention at Slough borough council.

Nottingham

In March, I announced the de-escalation of the statutory intervention at Nottingham city council and committed to appointing a second ministerial envoy. I am today appointing Sir Stephen Houghton CBE as political envoy in Nottingham to provide support and guidance to the council leadership to help build further on the improvements already under way.

Conclusion

I am committed to ensuring that the standards expected of local government are clear, and to working with these councils to ensure their compliance with the best value duty. I will deposit in the Library of the House copies of the documents referred to, which are being published on gov.uk today. Ministers will update the House in due course.

[HCWS267]

Open justice relies on court proceedings being transparent and accessible. This Government are committed to ensuring that appropriate court and tribunal information is available to the public, legal professionals, journalists, and researchers in a way that is both meaningful and secure. I am today updating the House on two actions towards that commitment: the expansion of His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service’s court and tribunal hearings service to include criminal court hearing lists, and the launch of a new data-sharing licence for organisations that successfully apply to analyse court data at scale.

On 10 February 2026, I updated Parliament on our intention to establish court and tribunal data-sharing arrangements, which would support the publication of hearing information while maintaining essential data protection safeguards. I am pleased today to report on the delivery of that commitment.

Court and tribunal hearings service expansion

CaTH is a secure online portal on gov.uk that publishes court hearing lists in an accessible format.

It makes court listing information freely and publicly accessible in one place, replacing fragmented and inconsistent local arrangements in local courts.

CaTH already published hearing lists for the civil and family courts, excluding the Court of Protection; for the first-tier and upper tribunals, excluding employment tribunals; for the Royal Courts of Justice and for single justice procedure cases. Since 1 April 2026, Crown court and magistrates court hearing lists have been added, meaning that all criminal court hearing lists are now available too.

The public can view all these court and tribunal hearing lists free of charge without registering. Authenticated users—such as journalists and legal professionals who are entitled to additional information—can access and receive notifications of enhanced court hearing lists, which include greater detail about cases, also free of charge. During a transitional phase, manual emails from local magistrates courts will continue.

Third-party courts and tribunals data licence

Supported by the recent CaTH service expansion, HMCTS has today launched a new non-exclusive third-party courts and tribunals data licence.

This enables organisations that successfully apply to conduct approved computational analysis of court and tribunal data, including court hearing lists, at scale. While it will be for successful applicants to determine, they might use the data to help journalists track cases and identify hearings of interest, or enable researchers and charities to analyse trends across the courts and tribunals system. This supports innovation, research, and wider public understanding of the justice system, in keeping with the principle of open justice.

Any organisation with a legitimate case for its use may apply for a licence, and multiple licences may be granted, enabling broad access to court and tribunal data while ensuring appropriate oversight.

The data-sharing licence includes robust safeguards. Applicants must satisfy a panel chaired by a member of the judiciary, that their proposed use is lawful and consistent with open justice principles, judicial independence, data protection rules, anti-bias, and computer-generated transparency. They must meet security standards, and access to restricted data is limited to those with an existing entitlement. The licence requires that information must not appear on search engines—and strictly prohibits sharing data into public large language models.

The panel will assess each application, including requested data retention periods that seek to maximise the benefits of open justice while balancing privacy, commercial value and data protection requirements, and the needs of specific user groups including researchers, academics, journalists, legal professionals, or charities.

The licence is launching free of charge, realising immediate benefits for open justice and transparency. The application form and guidance are now available on gov.uk, and I encourage interested organisations to apply.

[HCWS256]

Last month I announced a landmark package of measures to better protect children online. We announced that social media companies will no longer be able to offer their services to under-16s, introduced new restrictions on livestreaming and communications with strangers, and became the first country in the world to ban chatbots that offer sexualised content to children. We took these steps for a simple reason—to give children the best start in life, ensure their safety and wellbeing, and put power back in parents hands.

Today, we are publishing the second part of our response to the “Growing up in the online world” consultation, which had more than 116,000 responses from children, parents, teachers, industry, and civil society. Together with the measures announced last month, today marks the next step in our commitment to fundamentally reset expectations of what is safe and suitable for children online while ensuring young people are equipped to thrive in the digital world.

Default overnight and persuasive design restrictions

We know that online risks do not end when a child turns 16 years old, and our consultation results showed that nearly one in three children want help managing their screentime. We have heard clearly that we must support older teenagers to make safe, informed choices about their experiences online. We must also ensure that older teenagers are afforded appropriate levels of responsibility and agency as they approach adulthood. We will therefore require social media services to apply sensible default protections for 16 and 17-year-olds. These will include default overnight restrictions, with alerts and push notifications muted during a curfew period of midnight to 6 am, and default restrictions at all times on persuasive features such as autoplay and personalised recommender feeds to reduce infinite scrolling and make it easier for teenagers to log off.

This is about giving these older children more choice and control over the feeds and reducing that sense that they can never switch off being online. This will allow them to develop healthier online habits and focus on the development of their futures.

Artificial intelligence chatbots

The Government are also taking further action on AI chatbots and their impact on children and young people. We heard through the consultation of the benefits chatbots can offer children, particularly around education and creativity. But we also heard concerns about the novel risk emotional dependency can pose. We will therefore require mandatory breaks for under-18s using chatbots and will work with experts on how frequently, and for how long, these should happen.

I have said previously that there are serious concerns with other chatbots, including therapy chatbots. We will work with Department for Health and Social Care and the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to take stronger action on chatbots that may pose risks to children, through harmful, inaccurate or unverified mental health advice. We can commit today to consider a full range of options, including, if necessary, banning certain services that present a threat to children where other regulatory and safety mechanisms are insufficient. We will ensure the regulatory system for AI medical devices supports children to access trusted, evidence-based support. This will ensure that, where children seek medical advice, children and their parents can be sure that it meets certain standards and is safe.

We have always been clear that children should be able to benefit from the opportunities AI offers while being protected from harm and threats to wellbeing. We recognise that there is public appetite to do more on AI chatbots and how children use these, and the Government reserve the right to take further action in this area.

Risks of circumvention

We have always been clear that some children will try to get around the new social media requirements. They may use someone else’s account, enter a false age, borrow another device or use tools such as virtual private networks. While it is not possible to entirely eliminate this, requiring the use of highly effective age assurance is one of the best ways to make a meaningful difference and build on the Australian experience.

VPNs have legitimate privacy and security uses and we will therefore not age-gate or ban them. Instead, we will put an onus on platforms in scope of the new restrictions to take robust steps to detect and prevent attempts by underage users to circumvent age assurance measures.

I have already asked Ofcom to report by October on what highly effective age assurance looks like for determining whether someone is over 16. Today, I have also asked them, with input from the Information Commissioner’s Office as necessary, to conduct research into what more services can do to detect and prevent VPN use on their platforms. We will also engage with VPN providers on voluntary action and strengthen guidance and support for parents.

We will keep this area under close review and reserve the right to take further action on this, should evidence show that it is needed.

Support for children

Alongside regulation, it is critical that children are equipped with the skills they need to navigate online life safely and confidently, reflecting the different services and experiences that they will have access to as they grow older. Online safety is a critical component of relationships, sex and health education where the curriculum has already been strengthened for the next school year.

Together with the Department for Education, we will further strengthen children’s online safety and digital resilience, supporting children and young people beyond the classroom through youth organisations, libraries, community groups and civil society partners.

A safer online world must not only reduce harms but also help children access positive educational and age-appropriate content.

We will bring forward new, clear proposals alongside the new rules for online services. These could include:

age-appropriate guidance for parents and children on recognising positive content, using trusted sources and navigating online spaces safely;

best practice principles for industry on the availability, discovery and visibility of high-quality content for children;

reviews of international approaches and existing best practice to identify effective interventions and build the evidence base; and

voluntary commitments to increase the prominence of trusted, educational, developmental and wellbeing-focused content for young people

Support for parents

Parents and carers remain central to keeping children safe online. We will further develop the kids online safety hub as the Government’s principal source of trusted guidance and practical support, building on existing initiatives such as the You Won’t Know Until You Ask campaign. The hub will provide further advice on subjects including AI, healthy screen use, parental controls and emerging online risks. We will also work closely with the Department for Education and the Department of Health and Social Care as they develop guidance on the safe and positive use of devices for parents of children aged five to 16.

Conclusion

We are now moving at pace to implement our proposals, with the first regulations on the ban to be laid before the end of the year and coming into effect in early 2027.

The Government are clear that this is not the end of the story, and that we will not hesitate to take further measures where needed to ensure children’s safety and wellbeing, while enabling them to benefit from the opportunities that digital technologies provide, so that every child gets the best start in life.

[HCWS254]

The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) corporate plan 2026-27 is being laid today. This document will also be published on the ONR website: https://www.onr.org.uk/

I can confirm, in accordance with paragraph 25(3) of schedule 7 to the Energy Act 2013, that there have been no exclusions to the published document on the grounds of national security.

[HCWS249]

This ministerial statement is also available in British Sign Language here at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUrDclFi9M01

This Government recognise the need for continuous improvement in the accessibility of Government communications for everyone, including the deaf community and BSL users, The British Sign Language (BSL) Act 2022 supports this by creating a greater recognition and understanding of BSL, and requires the Government to report on what Departments listed in the Act have done to promote or facilitate the use of British Sign Language in their communications with the public.

The first report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022 was published on 31 July 2023, the second report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-sign-language-bsl-second-report-2023-to-2024/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2023-to-2024 on 17 December 2024—delayed due to the UK general election—and the third report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-sign-language-bsl-third-report-may-2024-to-april-2025 on 21 July 2025

The fourth BSL report, covering the period from 1 May 2025 to 30 April 2026, has now been published. A copy of this fourth report https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/british-sign-language-bsl-fourth-report-may-2025-to-april-2026 will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and published on gov.uk, including in BSL.

The Government are committed to ensuring that Government communications are as inclusive and accessible as possible. For this reason, although the BSL Act requires only that a report will be published every three years, the Government committed to increase the frequency of reporting to an annual basis for the five years up to 2027.

This is also why, last year, to accompany the publication of the third BSL report, each ministerial Department was asked to produce a five year BSL plan https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/british-sign-language-reports-and-action-plans setting out how they plan to improve the use of BSL within their Departments. An update on those plans is published alongside this report.

This fourth report demonstrates an increase in the usage of BSL by Government Departments in public-facing communications since last year, reaching the highest number recorded since reporting started in 2023. The overall number of new BSL communications produced by Government Departments has increased by 41%—from 140 to 198—since the last reporting period and by 161% since the first reporting period, when overall numbers were 76.

This Government want to ensure disabled people’s views and voices are at the heart of all we do. Government communications being accessible to deaf and disabled people is essential in supporting us to achieve this goal. This is why it is particularly encouraging to see that there has been an uplift in the amount of Government publications that have been translated into BSL. This includes plans, strategies, consultation documents or consultation responses. There has been an increase in the total number of these types of communications produced since the last reporting period, from 26 in 2025 to 87 in 2026.

By providing deaf BSL users with direct access to Government plans and consultations, this increase in accessible communication supports the Government commitment to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to engage with the Government on issues that will affect them.

However, we know there is still more to do and this Government are committed to going further. We will continue to work alongside the BSL Advisory Board https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/british-sign-language-bsl-advisory-board deaf people and their representative organisations, and Ministers across Government, including our lead Ministers for disability https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/lead-ministers-for-disability to continue to make tangible improvements for the deaf community.

We will continue to publish a report every year up to 2027, going further than the frequency required by the Act. The next report will be published in July 2027.

[HCWS248]