Lord Marlesford Portrait

Lord Marlesford

Conservative - Life peer

Became Member: 7th June 1991


1 APPG membership (as of 30 May 2024)
Egypt
European Union Committee
16th May 2012 - 14th May 2014
European Union Committee
8th Dec 2003 - 30th Oct 2007
Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
4th Dec 1991 - 17th Mar 1992


Division Voting information

During the current Parliament, Lord Marlesford has voted in 356 divisions, and 16 times against the majority of their Party.

13 Jan 2021 - Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Conservative Aye votes vs 213 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 262 Noes - 269
7 Dec 2020 - Conduct Committee Report - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Conservative No votes vs 147 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 408 Noes - 24
9 Nov 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 44 Conservative No votes vs 147 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 165 Noes - 433
9 Nov 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 38 Conservative No votes vs 134 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 407
21 Oct 2020 - Immigration and Social Security Co-ordination (EU Withdrawal) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Conservative Aye votes vs 197 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 166 Noes - 237
20 Oct 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 39 Conservative Aye votes vs 158 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 395 Noes - 169
28 Sep 2020 - Coronavirus Act 2020: Temporary Provisions - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 24 Conservative Aye votes vs 166 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 99 Noes - 198
17 Sep 2020 - Agriculture Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Conservative Aye votes vs 201 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 280 Noes - 218
23 Jun 2020 - Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 203 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 160 Noes - 241
23 Jun 2020 - Corporate Insolvency and Governance Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 7 Conservative Aye votes vs 191 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 155 Noes - 326
20 Jan 2020 - European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 176 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 206 Noes - 186
15 Apr 2021 - National Security and Investment Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Conservative Aye votes vs 222 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 296 Noes - 232
12 Oct 2021 - Skills and Post-16 Education Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 7 Conservative Aye votes vs 124 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 129
12 Oct 2021 - Skills and Post-16 Education Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Conservative Aye votes vs 131 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 135 Noes - 135
17 Jan 2022 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 9 Conservative Aye votes vs 157 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 261 Noes - 166
28 Feb 2022 - Nationality and Borders Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Marlesford voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 10 Conservative Aye votes vs 85 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 112 Noes - 89
View All Lord Marlesford Division Votes

Debates during the 2019 Parliament

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Baroness Williams of Trafford (Conservative)
Captain of the Honourable Corps of Gentlemen-at-Arms (HM Household) (Chief Whip, House of Lords)
(16 debate interactions)
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Conservative)
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
(8 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
Home Office
(15 debate contributions)
Ministry of Defence
(6 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
Legislation Debates
Agriculture Act 2020
(4,953 words contributed)
Nationality and Borders Act 2022
(1,177 words contributed)
Environment Act 2021
(1,034 words contributed)
View All Legislation Debates
View all Lord Marlesford's debates

Lords initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Lord Marlesford, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.


5 Bills introduced by Lord Marlesford


A Bill to make provision for the management of Parliament Square; and for connected purposes.

Lords - 80%

Last Event - Report Stage: House Of Lords
Tuesday 27th March 2012

A Bill to make provision for the introduction of a new set of council tax valuation bands to apply to all dwellings bought or sold after 1 April 2000

Lords - 60%

Last Event - Committee: 1st Sitting (Minutes Of Proceedings): House Of Lords
Friday 22nd April 2016

A Bill to introduce a civil penalty for littering from vehicles and to require local authorities to publish details of contracts relating to litter clearance.

Lords - 40%

Last Event - 2nd Reading: House Of Lords
Friday 19th July 2013

Lords - 20%

Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Lords
Tuesday 24th June 2014

First reading took place on 18 July. This stage is a formality that signals the start of the Bill's journey through the Lords.Second reading - the general debate on all aspects of the Bill - is yet to be scheduled. A bill to introduce a civil penalty for littering from vehicles and to require local authorities to publish details of contracts relating to litter clearance.

Lords - 20%

Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Lords
Wednesday 18th July 2012

Lord Marlesford has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


Latest 50 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
11 Other Department Questions
16th Apr 2024
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker on which dates and at what times the failure of the Polycom telephone system on the parliamentary estate started and ended, and why it took so long for the system to be restored.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. The Parliamentary Digital Service (PDS) were made aware of a potential issue affecting Polycom telephone handsets, used with the Microsoft telephone service (MS Teams) on Friday 12th April 2024. Following a thorough investigation, a root cause was identified and resolved on Tuesday 16th April 2024. Restoration of service following a major telephony incident depends on third parties. The Voice Programme is upgrading and replacing the existing telephony infrastructure with a streamlined and less complex support arrangement. PDS are expecting to rollout the service over the summer 2024.

16th Apr 2024
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker on what date at what cost to public funds the Polycom telephone system was installed on the parliamentary estate, and whether Siemens was invited to tender for this contract.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. In 2016, a procurement process was completed adhering to EU procurement regulations (OJEU) for a unified communications solution to replace the previous telephone system which was end of life and could no longer be supported or maintained. This restricted OJEU process was open to all vendors. Siemens (Unify) made an initial application but were not taken through to stage two of the process to tender.

The cost of the Skype for Business Programme, which included key steps in Parliament’s transition from a copper wire telephone system to Voice over Internet Protocol, was £8.3 million and included the cost of the Polycom handsets currently in use. Implementation of the Polycom handsets began in November 2017.

16th Apr 2024
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether the Parliamentary Digital Service plans to replace the Polycom telephone system on the parliamentary estate and, if so, what is the budget for this project.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. The Voice Programme has been set up to address service quality and user experience priorities regarding telephony in Parliament. The programme’s high-level benefits include increasing business resilience and value for money and improving customer experience across telephony services. The programme is upgrading and replacing the existing telephony infrastructure (a combination of on premise MS Teams and Skype for Business) and has completed procurement of a unified communications service, to be implemented later this year, that will deliver resilient telephony. Initially, the new service is expected- to re-utilise the existing Polycom telephone handsets, however, replacement telephone handsets will be introduced as part of product lifecycle replacement.

The House of Lords Services Committee, the House of Commons Administration Committee and the Business Resilience Board are being consulted on implementation plans for the new service.

The Investment Committee and Accounting Officers have approved a business case for the Voice Programme which has an approved whole life cost of £6.37m. These costs cover implementation, programme resources, licences, and support costs until FY28/29.

7th Dec 2023
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what was the cost to public funds of replacing the Siemens telephone system on the parliamentary estate with the Microsoft Polycom system; and what plans they have to replace the standard desk telephone sets with ones which are easier to use by those with impaired visual capability.

The Senior Deputy Speaker has asked me, as Chair of the Services Committee, to respond on his behalf. The cost of the original programme that replaced Parliament’s copper wire telephone system with voice over internet protocol (VoIP) telephony, including the Microsoft Polycom handsets, was £8.3 million. It was necessary to update the telephony as the previous telephone system was end of life and can no longer be supported or maintained.

Members and other Parliamentary users with visual impairments can use speech recognition software to use Teams. Support is available from the Parliamentary Digital Service for anyone requiring help to use the system. As part of implementation of a new telephony solution for Parliament in the first half of 2024 the Voice Programme team is exploring options for more user-friendly telephone handsets including accessible solutions for visually impaired users.

18th Oct 2022
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what would be the rate of attendance allowance for Members of the House of Lords in October 2022 if it had been uprated in line with inflation since it was introduced at £300.

The Daily Allowance rate was introduced on 1 October 2010 at £300 per day. Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures for October 2022 are expected to be released by the Office for National Statistics on 16 November. It is therefore not yet possible to calculate a figure for the Daily Allowance adjusted for inflation by CPI for the month of October 2022.

Based on September CPI figures, if the Daily Allowance rate had been adjusted annually for inflation, it would be £417 per day from 1 September 2022.

20th Jul 2021
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether the four members of the House of Lords Conduct Committee who are not Members of the House of Lords have full voting rights in any vote of that Committee which involves (1) the culpability of a Member of the House of Lords being investigated, and (2)  the decision as to any penalty on a Member of the House, to be reported for the approval of the House; and to which other Select Committees of the House similar voting rights apply to any outside members of such committees.

Following a consultation exercise and a lengthy debate on 30 April 2019, the House agreed that the lay members of the Conduct Committee should have full voting rights in order to bring a measure of independence to the conduct process. The House has not to date conferred voting rights on external members of other committees. In the House of Commons, the lay members of the Standards Committee (of which there are seven, alongside the seven MPs) have full voting rights, and the Independent Expert Panel which determines appeals and sanctions in cases of bullying, harassment and sexual misconduct is made up entirely of external members.

27th May 2021
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker how many Members of the House of Lords have so far completed the Valuing Everyone training sessions; how many of these Members submitted feedback on the sessions; and of these responses, how many overall were (1) favourable, and (2) unfavourable.

As at 9 June, 763 Members of the House of Lords have completed Valuing Everyone training. Of these, 492 completed an evaluation form. In response to the question ‘Would you recommend the course to others?’, 460 Members out of 485 (95%) answered ‘yes’. In response to the question ‘Please rate your level of confidence calling out unacceptable behaviour AFTER the course’, 447 Members out of 485 (92%) answered ‘very good’ or ‘good’.

27th May 2021
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what was the cost to the taxpayer of producing the film made for use in the Valuing Everyone training sessions for Members of the House of Lords.

The video made for use in Valuing Everyone training sessions for Members of the Lords cost £6,000.

In feedback following an earlier version of the training sessions, the course providers were explicitly asked by Members to make the video scenario more directly reminiscent of situations that have arisen in the Lords, rather than the previous and more generic video about a female employee and her manager which was used when the sessions were attended by a mixture of MPs and Peers.

4th Feb 2021
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker how much was paid to Members of the House of Lords in financial support (excluding travel costs) in each month during 2020.

The total amount of financial support (excluding travel costs) paid to Members of the House of Lords in each month during 2020 was as follows;


Month


Amount                £000s


January 2020


2,135


February 2020


1,643


March 2020


1,385


April 2020


80


May 2020


226


June 2020


711


July 2020


539


August 2020


0


September 2020


1,471


October 2020


1,538


November 2020


1,478


December 2020


1,112

4th Feb 2021
To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker what has been the total cost to public funds to date for Members of the House of Lords undertaking Valuing Everyone training.

To date, £82,158 has been spent on Valuing Everyone training for members of the House of Lords. The same training courses have been offered to, and attended by, members of both Houses. This figure includes an assumption of cost per head, as well as 30% share of development costs, pilot sessions and administration fees.

18th Apr 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government what arrangements are in place to ensure that individuals convicted of abuse of public office and given custodial sentences are not re-employed in central government departments or agencies of central government.

All Civil Service recruitment is subject to the Baseline Personnel Security Standard. The Government Baseline Personnel Security Standard check is not a formal security clearance but is a recognised standard for pre-employment screening. These checks ensure departments comply with current legislation (e.g. Right to Work in the UK) and are essential to assure the integrity of our organisation and the safety of staff and individuals.

Once a job offer is made a Basic Disclosure & Barring Service (DBS) check is undertaken. The certificate will contain details of convictions and conditional cautions that are considered to be unspent under the terms of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

If the DBS check is returned with a positive marker (an unspent convention in a basic check, any conviction in a standard check), the vacancy holder/department undertakes a risk assessment to decide whether to make a final offer.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
20th Jun 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government to give the names and pay grades of each politically appointed senior special adviser to each Minister.

Information on all Special Advisers, including names and pay bands, is published annually in the Annual Report on Special Advisers, as required by the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

The latest iteration of the report is scheduled to be published in the Summer.

Baroness Neville-Rolfe
Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
27th Oct 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what percentage of those who died with COVID-19 in each of the last 20 weeks had received no vaccination against the disease.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

Professor Sir Ian Diamond | National Statistician

Lord Marlesford

House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

4 November 2021

Dear Lord Marlesford,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Question asking what percentage of those who died with COVID-19 in each of the last 20 weeks had received no vaccination against the disease (HL3492).

The data requested is provided, for England, in Table 1, using the most recent data we have available. Information on vaccination status is not included on the death certificate. It is obtained by linkage to the vaccination data from the National immunisation Management Service (NIMS) produced by NHS-E. While the Office for National Statistics (ONS) are responsible for the production of mortality data for England and Wales, we do not hold similar data for Wales. National Records Scotland (NRS) and Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) are responsible for statistics pertaining to Scotland and Northern Ireland.

Please note that the numbers of deaths of unvaccinated persons will depend on the changing number of people who are unvaccinated and the changing characteristics of unvaccinated people, which vary due to the selective vaccination roll-out and differences in uptake.

To compare the risk of death in unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals, we advise using the age-standardised mortality rates (ASMRs) for deaths involving COVID-19 for unvaccinated persons and for other vaccination statuses in our publication “Deaths involving COVID-19 by vaccination status, England: deaths occurring between 2 January and 24 September 2021” [1]. These take into account the changing size and age structure of the populations with different vaccination status. This data is for England only and covers approximately 86% of all deaths.These ASMRs show that the risk of death involving COVID-19 is much lower in fully vaccinated than in unvaccinated people.

Please note, other factors such as the health of the people who are unvaccinated may differ from the vaccinated population and change over time, which will affect the age-standardised mortality rates.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/latest

Lord True
Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
23rd Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what proportion of the first 100,000 people to die as a result of COVID-19 died in (1) England, (2) Scotland, (3) Wales, and (4) Northern Ireland; how many of those died (a) in hospital, (b) in care homes, and (c) elsewhere; and how many of those were (i) over 80 years old, (ii) over 70 years old, (iii) under 50 years old, (iv) BAME, (v) male, and (vi) female.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have, therefore, asked the Authority to respond.

Professor Sir Ian Diamond | National Statistician

The Lord Marlesford DL
House of Lords

London

SW1A 0PW

03 March 2021

Dear Lord Marlesford,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Question asking what proportion of the first 100,000 people to die as a result of COVID-19 died in (1) England, (2) Scotland, (3) Wales, and (4) Northern Ireland; how many of those died (a) in hospital, (b) in care homes, and (c) elsewhere; and how many of those were (i) over 80 years old, (ii) over 70 years old, (iii) under 50 years old, (iv) BAME, (v) male, and (vi) female (HL13602).

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) publishes statistics on deaths in England and Wales and produces a weekly report[1] on provisional numbers of deaths involving COVID-19. Mortality statistics are compiled from information supplied when deaths are certified and registered as part of civil registration. National Records for Scotland[2] and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency[3] are responsible for publishing statistics on deaths registered in Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively.

We cannot precisely organise deaths involving COVID-19 into the ‘first 100,000’ at this time. However, we have provided figures for deaths registered up to the end of Week 2 of 2021 (ending 15 January 2021) which is when deaths involving COVID-19 first passed 100,000 in total.

Table 1 below provides the number of deaths involving COVID-19 in the UK, and the proportion of these in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Table 2 provides the number of deaths involving COVID-19 by place of death in each UK country. Table 3 provides the number of deaths involving COVID by age group and sex. Please note that the UK totals in Table 3 are slightly different from Tables 1 and 2, as published data by age group and sex are only available for England and Wales combined (including non-residents) rather than England and Wales as individual countries.

The ONS has published a report on ethnic contrasts in deaths involving COVID-19 in England and Wales[4]. Table 4 shows the number of deaths involving COVID-19 in England and Wales; data have been published for deaths that occurred (rather than were registered) between 2 March 2020 and 28 July 2020. Please note this data includes only deaths that could be linked to the 2011 Census, as this was necessary to obtain ethnic group data. Because the method of calculation is different, the numbers do not relate directly to those in Tables 1 to 3.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

Table 1: Number and proportion of deaths involving COVID-19, weeks ending 13 March 2020 to 15 January 2021, England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland [5][6][7][8][9]

-

UK

England

Wales

Scotland1

Northern Ireland

Number of deaths involving COVID-19

104,446

88,974

5,884

7,460

2,128

% of UK total

100.0%

85.2%

5.6%

7.1%

2.0%

Source: ONS, NRS, and NISRA

Table 2: Number of deaths involving COVID-19, weeks ending 13 March 2020 to 15 January 2021 by place of occurrence, England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland [10][11]

Place of death

UK

England

Wales

Scotland1

Northern Ireland

All places of death

104,446

88,974

5,884

7,460

2,128

Home

5,256

4,376

286

459

135

Care home

26,393

21,615

1,267

2,869

642

Hospital

70,793

61,101

4,247

4,116

1,329

Other

2,004

1,882

84

16

22

Source: ONS, NRS and NISRA


Table 3: Number of deaths involving COVID-19, weeks ending 13 March 2020 to 15 January 2021, by broad age group and sex, England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland

Sex

Age group

UK total6

England & Wales6

Scotland

Northern Ireland

People

All ages

103,720

94,132

7,460

2,128

-

Under 1 year

3

2

1

0

-

1-14

9

9

0

0

-

15-44

1,004

941

49

14

-

45-64

9,615

8,777

670

168

-

65-74

15,798

14,305

1,188

305

-

75-84

33,855

30,647

2,478

730

-

85+

43,436

39,451

3,074

911

Males

All ages

56,596

51,693

3,831

1,072

-

Under 1 year

2

2

0

0

-

1-14

4

4

0

0

-

15-44

587

554

27

6

-

45-64

6,188

5,656

433

99

-

65-74

10,036

9,119

729

188

-

75-84

19,848

18,067

1,376

405

-

85+

19,931

18,291

1,266

374

Females

All ages

47,124

42,439

3,629

1,056

-

Under 1 year

1

0

1

0

-

1-14

5

5

0

0

-

15-44

417

387

22

8

-

45-64

3,427

3,121

237

69

-

65-74

5,762

5,186

459

117

-

75-84

14,007

12,580

1,102

325

-

85+

23,505

21,160

1,808

537

Source: ONS, NRS and NISRA


Table 4: Number of deaths involving COVID-19 by ethnic group and sex, deaths occurring 2 March 2020 to 28 July 2020, England and Wales[12][13]

Ethnic group

Sex

Aged 9 to 64 years

Aged 65 to 110 years

Bangladeshi

Male

61

112

Bangladeshi

Female

19

54

Black African

Male

159

188

Black African

Female

85

96

Black Caribbean

Male

95

514

Black Caribbean

Female

67

306

Chinese

Male

16

78

Chinese

Female

8

55

Indian

Male

180

525

Indian

Female

80

357

Mixed

Male

29

144

Mixed

Female

30

99

Other

Male

186

351

Other

Female

85

226

Pakistani

Male

119

286

Pakistani

Female

75

156

White

Male

1,939

20,531

White

Female

1,184

18,201

Source: ONS

[1]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsregisteredweeklyinenglandandwalesprovisional/latest

[2]https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/

[3]https://www.nisra.gov.uk/

[4]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/updatingethniccontrastsindeathsinvolvingthecoronaviruscovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurring2marchto28july2020

[5] Weeks for Scotland run Monday to Sunday rather than Saturday to Friday, so Week 2 of 2021 is week ending 11th January 2021 rather than week ending 15 January 2021

[6] Figures for individual countries exclude deaths of non-residents. Figures for “England and Wales” totals include non-residents of England and Wales; for this reason, UK totals in Table 3 differ from Tables 1 and 2.

[7] Data in Tables 1, 3 and 3 are based on date a death was registered rather than occurred. Data in Table 4 are based on the date a death occurred, registered up to 24 August 2020. There is a delay between a death occurring and it being registered

[8] All figures for 2020 and 2021 are provisional.

[9] The International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Edition (ICD-10) definitions are as follows: coronavirus (COVID-19) (U07.1 and U07.2). We use the term “involving COVID-19” when referring to deaths that mentioned these ICD-10 codes anywhere on the death certificate, whether as the underlying cause of death or elsewhere.

[10] Deaths at home are those at the usual residence of the deceased (according to the informant)‚ where this is not a communal establishment. Other Communal Establishments include (for example) prisons, student residences, and hotels. Elsewhere includes all places not covered above.

[11] "Other" includes deaths in communal establishments other than hospitals and care homes, in hospices, and that occurred "elsewhere".

[12]Data in Table 4 includes only death records that could be linked to the 2011 Census, to obtain ethnic group data.

[13]The detailed composition of each ethnic group is available to download: https://www.ons.gov.uk/download/table?format=xlsx&uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/articles/updatingethniccontrastsindeathsinvolvingthecoronaviruscovid19englandandwales/deathsoccurring2marchto28july2020/22f0c996.json

Lord True
Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
23rd Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord True on 28 May (HL4424), what estimate they have made of the total number of deaths from COVID-19 in the UK in each week since 1 May.

The information requested falls under the remit of the UK Statistics Authority. I have therefore asked the Authority to respond.

Dear Lord Marlesford,

As National Statistician and Chief Executive of the UK Statistics Authority, I am responding to your Parliamentary Question asking, further to the Written Answer by Lord True on 28 May (HL4424), about the total number of deaths from COVID-19 in the UK in each week since 1 May (HL7234).

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) is responsible for publishing numbers of deaths registered in England and Wales. The most recent annual figures published are for deaths registered in 2019[1]. However, we do publish provisional weekly deaths registrations, which are currently available for deaths registered up to 10 July 2020[2]. National Records Scotland (NRS) and the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) are responsible for publishing the number of deaths registered in Scotland and Northern Ireland respectively.

Cause of death is defined using the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th edition (ICD-10). Deaths involving COVID-19, as either a contributory or underlying cause of death, are identified by the ICD-10 codes U07.1 and U07.2.

The accompanying dataset2 to our provisional weekly deaths bulletin includes UK data on deaths involving COVID-19, which refer to deaths where COVID-19 was mentioned anywhere on the death certificate.

Table 1 shows the provisional number of deaths involving COVID-19 registered each week in the UK from the week ending 8 May up to the week ending 10 July 2020, broken down by country.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Sir Ian Diamond

Table 1: Number of deaths involving COVID-19 registered each week in the UK, week ending 8 May up to the week ending 10 July 2020[3][4][5][6][7][8][9]

Week number

Week ended

UK

England

Wales

Scotland

Northern Ireland

19

08-May-20

4,426

3,716

211

415

84

20

15-May-20

4,214

3,624

180

336

74

21

22-May-20

2,872

2,455

134

230

53

22

29-May-20

2,000

1,715

105

131

49

23

05-Jun-20

1,697

1,488

100

89

20

24

12-Jun-20

1,204

1,057

57

69

21

25

19-Jun-20

849

744

39

49

17

26

26-Jun-20

651

574

30

35

12

27

03-Jul-20

561

497

35

18

11

28

10-Jul-20

388

344

22

13

9


[1]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsregisteredinenglandandwalesseriesdrreferencetables

[2]https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

[3]Cause of death was defined using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes U07.1, U07.2

[4]Figures are based on deaths registered up to 1 May 2020

[5]All figures for 2020 are provisional

[6]Weekly deaths for Scotland are produced by NRS: https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/covid19stats

[7]Weekly deaths for Northern Ireland are produced by NISRA: https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/covid19stats

[8]England, Wales and Northern Ireland weekly deaths run from Saturday to Friday, Scotland deaths run from Monday to Sunday

[9]Northern Ireland week allocation differs from other countries. For example, week 1 is week ending 10-Jan. This has been adjusted for the purpose of aggregating the data

Lord True
Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
18th Dec 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the projected cost of £20 billion for the construction of the Sizewell C nuclear power station; and what is the likelihood of that figure being exceeded.

In 2016, the Government negotiated the Contract for Difference for Hinkley Point C which fixes the cost of electricity provided by Hinkley Point C. There is no cost to the consumer until Hinkley Point C starts to produce electricity. The strike price is £92.50 per Megawatt-hour. The household bill impact depends on a variety of factors such as the future electricity generation mix, wholesale gas price, wholesale electricity price and decarbonisation pathway.

The Government is a co-shareholder in the Sizewell C project company with EDF. The Government has committed to invest c.£1.2bn in Sizewell C’s development. The project has been designated to benefit from the new Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model for nuclear, which will entail a levy on all licensed electricity suppliers in Great Britain; suppliers may choose to pass those costs to their consumers. The RAB model will include incentives on cost and schedule control, with the exact details finalised at the project’s Final Investment Decision.

The capital costs for Sizewell C are commercially sensitive, and subject to ongoing development and a live equity raise. We are therefore unable to discuss this further at this time.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
18th Dec 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what public funds they have committed for the construction by EDF of nuclear power stations at Hinkley Point and Sizewell, respectively; and from what other sources, including a levy on consumers for sales of electricity, funding has been offered for each.

In 2016, the Government negotiated the Contract for Difference for Hinkley Point C which fixes the cost of electricity provided by Hinkley Point C. There is no cost to the consumer until Hinkley Point C starts to produce electricity. The strike price is £92.50 per Megawatt-hour. The household bill impact depends on a variety of factors such as the future electricity generation mix, wholesale gas price, wholesale electricity price and decarbonisation pathway.

The Government is a co-shareholder in the Sizewell C project company with EDF. The Government has committed to invest c.£1.2bn in Sizewell C’s development. The project has been designated to benefit from the new Regulated Asset Base (RAB) model for nuclear, which will entail a levy on all licensed electricity suppliers in Great Britain; suppliers may choose to pass those costs to their consumers. The RAB model will include incentives on cost and schedule control, with the exact details finalised at the project’s Final Investment Decision.

The capital costs for Sizewell C are commercially sensitive, and subject to ongoing development and a live equity raise. We are therefore unable to discuss this further at this time.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
14th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to make a decision on (1) whether to grant Sizewell C a Development Consent Order, or (2) any commitment of public investment in Sizewell C, before the appointment of a new Prime Minister; and what assessment they have made of the conformity of any such decisions with the Prime Minister’s statement to Cabinet on 6 July that major fiscal decisions should be left for the next Prime Minister.

The Secretary of State granted development consent for the Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station on July 20th 2022, after thorough consideration of all relevant information.

Commercial negotiations on the project are strictly separate from consideration of the application for development consent. To date these negotiations have been constructive, but are ongoing and no decisions have been made.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
13th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government which minister from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy will be making the decision as to whether Sizewell C will be granted a Development Consent Order.

The decision on the application for development consent for Sizewell C Nuclear Power Station was announced on 20 July 2022. The then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Paul Scully took the decision on behalf of the Secretary of State who had confirmed that his delegation of the decision-making powers to Minister Scully in respect of the Sizewell C application should continue, notwithstanding Minister Scully’s move to the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
23rd Feb 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the area of land that has been used in England for the installation of solar panels in each of the last five years.

The Government does not hold information on the area of land in England used for solar installations.

Further information is available on GOV.UK.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
7th Sep 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to remove China General Nuclear from further participation in the Bradwell B and Sizewell C nuclear power projects.

The Government has been holding constructive negotiations with the developer of Sizewell C since January, CGN has a stake in the project up to the point of Final Investment Decision (FID), however no decisions on the project have been taken, including the potential final configuration of investors. The Government has committed to bring at least one large-scale nuclear project to the point of FID by the end of this Parliament and have entered negotiations with Sizewell C on that basis. Any investment in nuclear projects is subject to thorough scrutiny and needs to satisfy our robust legal, regulatory and national security requirements.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
7th Sep 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the deterioration of the fuel rod sealings at pressure reactors installed in Taishan, China, for the Sizewell C nuclear power project.

As we stated in our response to the consultation on a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) for nuclear published on 14th December 2020, we believe that a RAB is a credible model for funding nuclear projects, as it should reduce the cost of finance and thereby reduce consumer bills.

We are also considering whether a RAB model could be applied to other low carbon technologies, including transport and storage infrastructure for carbon dioxide (outlined in the government’s response to the carbon capture, usage and storage business models consultation).

We have always been clear that any new nuclear project must provide value for money for consumers and taxpayers.

Currently no decisions have been taken concerning Government financing of the Sizewell C nuclear power project, ahead of the final investment decision.

The Government continues to explore the use of a Regulated Asset Base model for new nuclear projects and believes that this could be a viable means by which to finance new projects. Decisions on how the model would be applied to new projects have yet to be taken and would be subject to value for money and all relevant approvals.

BEIS officials are engaged regularly with representatives from both EDF Energy and the Office for Nuclear Regulation (the ONR) on a wide range of matters relating to nuclear reactors.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
7th Sep 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the case for them to have a stake in Sizewell C nuclear power project; and whether the financial return accrued by (1) the taxpayer, and (2) private sector investors, would be the same.

As we stated in our response to the consultation on a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) for nuclear published on 14th December 2020, we believe that a RAB is a credible model for funding nuclear projects, as it should reduce the cost of finance and thereby reduce consumer bills.

We are also considering whether a RAB model could be applied to other low carbon technologies, including transport and storage infrastructure for carbon dioxide (outlined in the government’s response to the carbon capture, usage and storage business models consultation).

We have always been clear that any new nuclear project must provide value for money for consumers and taxpayers.

Currently no decisions have been taken concerning Government financing of the Sizewell C nuclear power project, ahead of the final investment decision.

The Government continues to explore the use of a Regulated Asset Base model for new nuclear projects and believes that this could be a viable means by which to finance new projects. Decisions on how the model would be applied to new projects have yet to be taken and would be subject to value for money and all relevant approvals.

BEIS officials are engaged regularly with representatives from both EDF Energy and the Office for Nuclear Regulation (the ONR) on a wide range of matters relating to nuclear reactors.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
7th Sep 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to legislate to allow the use of a Regulated Asset Base funding model for (1) new nuclear infrastructure, and (2) other energy projects.

As we stated in our response to the consultation on a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) for nuclear published on 14th December 2020, we believe that a RAB is a credible model for funding nuclear projects, as it should reduce the cost of finance and thereby reduce consumer bills.

We are also considering whether a RAB model could be applied to other low carbon technologies, including transport and storage infrastructure for carbon dioxide (outlined in the government’s response to the carbon capture, usage and storage business models consultation).

We have always been clear that any new nuclear project must provide value for money for consumers and taxpayers.

Currently no decisions have been taken concerning Government financing of the Sizewell C nuclear power project, ahead of the final investment decision.

The Government continues to explore the use of a Regulated Asset Base model for new nuclear projects and believes that this could be a viable means by which to finance new projects. Decisions on how the model would be applied to new projects have yet to be taken and would be subject to value for money and all relevant approvals.

BEIS officials are engaged regularly with representatives from both EDF Energy and the Office for Nuclear Regulation (the ONR) on a wide range of matters relating to nuclear reactors.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
4th Feb 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the response by Baroness Bloomfield of Hinton Waldrist on 3 February (HL Deb, col 2168), whether they have made a decision to proceed with the construction by EDF of the new nuclear power station Sizewell C; and, if so, when this decision was made.

I assume my noble Friend is referring to our announcement to the House that we are entering negotiations with EDF, in relation to Sizewell C. Our aim is to bring at least one large-scale nuclear project to the point of Final Investment Decision by the end of this Parliament. No decision has yet been taken to proceed with Sizewell C, and the successful conclusion of these negotiations will be subject to full Government, regulatory and other approvals, including value for money.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
3rd Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the data collected, and (2) calculations made, by the Nuclear New Build Generation Company of the lifecycle CO2 emissions of the proposed Sizewell C nuclear power project.

Before entering into commitments to support any nuclear project, the Government’s assessment would include whether the project was expected to contribute to the target of net zero emissions by 2050.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
3rd Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with Nuclear New Build Generation Company and EDF Energy about the possibility of using the site at Wylfa Newydd to construct EPR nuclear reactors (1) instead of, or (2) in addition to, the site at Sizewell C; and what was the outcome of those discussions.

We continually engage with new nuclear developers to understand the merits of their proposed projects and we remain willing to discuss new nuclear projects with any viable developers and investors wishing to develop sites in the UK, including at the Wylfa site. Hitachi still own the site at Wylfa, we will have discussions with them about the future of the site in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
3rd Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to publish the Lifecycle Assessment of the Carbon Footprint of the proposed Hinkley Point C (HPC) project report, referenced in the Hinkley Point C application for Development Consent, on which Nuclear New Build Generation Company’s estimate of the level of emissions from Hinkley Point C is based.

The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy does not hold a copy of the Lifecycle Assessment of the Carbon Footprint of the proposed Hinkley Point C (HPC) project report.

While there are references to the Lifecycle Assessment in the Sustainability Statement which accompanied the application for development consent for the Hinkley Point C nuclear power station (and which was considered by the Examining Authority), a copy of the Lifecycle Assessment was not submitted with the application.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
30th Nov 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their Ten Point Plan for a Green Industrial Revolution, published on 18 November, what criteria they intend to use to assess the value for money of potential large-scale new nuclear projects.

The Government consulted on a Regulated Asset Base as a possible funding model for new nuclear projects. The consultation set out a proposed test to assess value for money for consumers and taxpayers.

The Government’s response to the consultation was published on 14 December 2020 and is available at the GOV.UK website.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
30th Nov 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they intend to appoint advisors to assist in assessing the value for money of the proposed Sizewell C nuclear project.

Nuclear power provides a reliable source of low-carbon electricity. The Government is pursuing large-scale new nuclear projects subject to clear value for money for both consumers and taxpayers and all relevant approvals. We continue to engage regularly with developers to understand the available options. The Government uses advisors to support discussions with developers, including on the value for money of proposed new nuclear projects.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
26th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to use the Regulated Asset Base model for the financing of the proposed Sizewell C nuclear power station; and what assessment they have made of the impact of those plans on total Government borrowing.

In 2019, the Government consulted on a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) as a possible funding model. A RAB has the potential to reduce the cost of raising private finance for new nuclear projects, thereby reducing consumer bills and maximising value for money for consumers and taxpayers. We will publish our response to the consultation in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
26th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to take a direct financial stake in the Sizewell C nuclear power project; and if so, whether any decision to do so would need to occur after the conclusion of the planning process.

The Government is looking at options for the financing of new nuclear projects. In 2019, we consulted on a Regulated Asset Base as a possible funding model that could attract private finance with the potential to bring significant investment for future nuclear projects at a lower cost to consumers, enabling low carbon power to be delivered at scale. We will respond in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
26th Oct 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the potential for delay in the consideration of the planning application for the Sizewell C nuclear power project as a result of changes made to submitted proposals by EDF Energy.

The timetable for examining each application for development consent for nationally significant infrastructure projects is for an Examining Authority, appointed by the Planning Inspectorate, to decide. In finalising a timetable, the Examining Authority will take account of the need to ensure that all parties to an examination have an opportunity to consider and comment on the application under consideration. Once the examination commences, the timetable will follow the statutory provisions set out in the Planning Act 2008.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
28th Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to publish a Green Paper for public consultation on the energy options available for the UK prior to publishing an energy White Paper.

The Energy White Paper will be published in the Autumn. We will engage our stakeholders in the implementation of its policy package, including through formal consultations, where appropriate.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
28th Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether China General Nuclear Cooperation’s 20 per cent holding in NNB Generation Company (SZC) Ltd entitles that Cooperation to a nuclear site licence for Sizewell C; and what assessment they have made of the suitability of that cooperation as a nuclear power operator if they subsequently acquired a controlling interest in NNB Generation Company (SZC) Ltd.

All nuclear site licences are assessed and granted by the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR). Site licensees are required to comply with stringent safety and security regulations overseen by the ONR.

A nuclear site licence does not confer any special status on shareholders, regardless of the size of their stake, and does not entitle them to hold a nuclear site licence now or in the future. An individual site licence is not transferable; any significant change in the management structure of NNB Generating Company (SZC) Ltd would trigger a revision and reapproval of the site licence to reflect the new arrangements.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
24th Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they intend to announce details of the financial funding arrangements for the proposed Sizewell C nuclear power station, in particular the method by which electricity consumers would be protected from future project cost escalation; and what plans they have to publish those details before the Development Consent Order application, accepted by the Planning Inspectorate on 26 June, is considered at Examination.

The Government is reviewing options for the financing of new nuclear projects. In 2019, we consulted on a Regulated Asset Base (RAB) as a possible funding model for future nuclear projects. The consultation sought views from stakeholders on proposed design principles for a nuclear RAB, including risk sharing arrangements with consumers. Our consultation was not project specific, as each project has its own financial considerations. We are currently considering consultation feedback and will respond in due course.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
24th Jul 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to pause consideration of the application by EDF to construct the proposed Sizewell C nuclear power station at the end of the pre-examination stage, until those who are unable to take part in a virtual examination as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic may take part in an open examination.

The Examining Authority at the Planning Inspectorate will proceed with its consideration of EDF’s application in line with the published guidance on current procedures for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. The Planning Inspectorate is considering ways in which the process can be conducted to ensure that Interested Parties are able to take part. There are currently no plans to pause the application at the end of the pre-examination stage. Further information is available at the GOV.UK website.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
21st Apr 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government why the sale of building materials that are required to maintain the standards of residential properties are being restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Government has set out that construction and associated activities can continue during the Covid-19 outbreak. No restrictions have been placed upon the sale of building materials. The Government is working with the construction industry to ensure the continued operation of the supply chain, including developing Site and Branch Operating Procedures for firms and merchants.

Lord Callanan
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
16th Nov 2022
To ask His Majesty's Government what progress they have made regarding the conservation of Shrubland Hall in Suffolk, including ensuring that the listed structures are intact, since that property was put on the Heritage at Risk Register by Historic England in November 2021.

Shrubland Hall, associated structures and parkland remain on Historic England’s Heritage at Risk Register. Historic England is continuing to work with the owners and the local authority, with the ambition of improving the condition of the buildings and parkland and putting in place appropriate conservation management planning, so that the site can be removed from the Register in due course.

Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
10th Jan 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government how they assess and determine the financial surplus required to induce farmers to participate in schemes under the Sustainable Farming Incentive.

The SFI standards payment rates have been set to balance good value for money for the taxpayer and delivery of ambitious environmental outcomes.


Defra sets payment rates based on the net income the farmer would forgo on their land and the net costs of delivering the action for the average (median) farm eligible for the action, which is the methodology used in our environmental schemes such as Countryside Stewardship. These rates are independently verified by evidence from specialist consultancies.

Lord Benyon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
23rd Feb 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to ban the (1) installation, (2) sale, and (3) use, of wood-burning stoves in private dwellings, in either (a) rural, or (b) urban, areas.

We currently have no plans to introduce a ban on the installation, sale or use of wood-burning stoves in private dwellings. Woodburning stoves are subject to strict controls in terms of emissions of air pollutants and some households in rural areas rely on the use of these appliances to heat their homes. In Smoke Control Areas woodburning stoves use must comply with the relevant legislation restricting smoke emissions. The recently introduced Environment Act 2021 will make it easier for local authorities to enforce these requirements. Outside of these areas, from 1 January 2022, all new solid fuel burning stoves entering the market must adhere to specific air quality standards and in October 2020 we introduced new legislation to phase out the most polluting fuels used for domestic combustion with most measures coming into force on 1 May 2021.

21st Apr 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they intend to respond to the letter from the Master of the Company of Gardeners to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, dated 9 April, about the difficulties experienced by the horticultural industry as a result of the COVID-19 regulations; and what consultation they have conducted into the case for reopening garden centres under conditions which could maintain social distancing.

The Government are aware of the challenging position facing the horticulture industry during this period and are grateful for the letter from the Master of the Company of the Gardeners highlighting some of the issues faced by the sector. A response can be expected from the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs imminently.

The Government continues to assess the decision on garden centres, but concluded at the last review that it was too early to ease any restrictions on such retail environments. Social distancing requirements will continue to be considered in accordance with this review.

Stores can operate Click and Collect services as long as orders are taken online, by telephone or via post and customers remain outside of the store to collect their goods.

In this situation, as generally, businesses are advised to operate with strict adherence to the social distancing guidelines.

7th Dec 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what major roadworks are in progress on (1) the A12 Trunk Road between the M25 and Ipswich, and (2) the A14 between Cambridge and Ipswich; when each such undertaking is expected to be completed; and what further major roadworks are expected to start within the next 12 months.

  1. The following major roadworks are in progress on:

The A12 Trunk Road between the M25 and Ipswich

National Highways is currently working through an extensive programme to rebuild concrete roads which have come to the end of their serviceable life, and which require high levels of intervention to maintain them. National Highways will be reconstructing the carriageway and replacing it with a modern asphalt surface. This will improve safety, create smoother quieter journeys and extend the life of the A12 to make it fit for the future. There are two such schemes currently underway on the A12:

A12 Margaretting Bypass (junctions 13 to 15) a £65million concrete road reconstruction scheme – expected completion by summer 2024.

A12 Marks Tey (junction 25) to Stanway (junction 26) a £37milllion concrete road reconstruction scheme – expected completion by summer 2024.

National Highways is also delivering major improvements to increase capacity, reduce congestion and improve safety at M25 junction 28. This circa £160million junctions enhancement scheme is expected to complete by summer 2025.

The A14 between Cambridge and Ipswich

There are ongoing road works on the A14 Haughley (junction 47a) to Tothill (junction 49) as part of a £37 million concrete road reconstruction scheme expected to be completed by summer 2024. National Highways is currently reconstructing the carriageway and replacing it with a modern asphalt surface.

  1. In July 2023, National Highways published its Delivery Plan which sets out its plan to start works on the A12 Chelmsford to A120 improvement scheme by the end of March 2024. A decision on the Development Consent Order for this scheme is to be made by 12 January 2024.
Lord Davies of Gower
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
20th Jun 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government which sections of the A12 between Ipswich and Lowestoft are single carriageway; and what commitment they have made to finance the upgrading of each such section to dual carriageway.

Most of this stretch of the A12 is single carriageway apart from dual carriageway sections at Wickham Market, Saxmundham, Wangford and Kessingland. The Government is considering an Outline Business Case from Suffolk County Council for a number of improvements to the A12 which includes dualling between the B1438 and the B1079. It would be for the Council to identify any further improvement proposals and to bid for Government funding as and when future funding opportunities arise.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
20th Jun 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the potential impact of the use of digital evidence in the enforcement around insecure roads of litter laws upon (a) road safety, and (b) the Highways Agency litter performance indicator.

Under Section 8 of the Road Traffic Act (1991), a person is guilty of an offence if they use, or permit or cause another person to use, a motor vehicle or trailer on a road when the condition of the motor vehicle or trailer or of its accessories or equipment, or the weight, position or distribution of its load or the manner in which it is secured, is such that the use of the motor vehicle or trailer involves a danger of injury to any person. Enforcement in this area is conducted by the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency’s enforcement officers and the police.

National Highways engages with organisations who have the necessary powers to take enforcement action. Commercial operators and drivers are legally obliged to ensure their loads are effectively secured, and risk finding themselves subject to disciplinary action by the Traffic Commissioner responsible for the issue of heavy goods operator licences, if found to be littering with an unsecure load.

National Highways are currently working with a local authority to trial the use of Artificial Intelligence and camera technology to provide evidence of littering to support local authority enforcement. This trial forms part of National Highways’ approach to reduce littering and litter on the strategic road network, thus increasing performance against its litter performance metric. If the trial is successful, National Highways will consider potential future roll out.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
20th Jun 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the effectiveness of current litter performance indicators pertaining to value for money and customer satisfaction with highway maintenance; and, if they do not have one, whether they will make one.

In the second Road Investment Strategy (2020-25) National Highways were allocated £6.5bn for the operation and maintenance of the Strategic Road Network (SRN). A proportion of this funding will be allocated within National Highways to carry out its litter clearance duties. For 2021/22 National Highways reported that 60.8% of its network was predominately free of litter, refuse or detritus apart from some small items, in line with the Code of practice on litter and refuse published by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. This was an improvement from 49.2% reported for 2020/21. The performance for 2022/23 will be published later this summer.

Customer satisfaction of the SRN is provided through the Strategic Road User Survey (SRUS) which is undertaken by Transport Focus, the independent watchdog for transport users. For period April 22 to March 23, 73% of those surveyed were either very satisfied or fairly satisfied with the overall safety, condition and management of the road network.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
20th Jun 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to enforce legislation pertaining to littering on slip roads off roads managed by National Highways.

The responsibility for clearing highway litter and sweeping carriageways is governed by the Environmental Protection Act (1990); Section 89(1) places a duty on National Highways to ensure that the motorways and some trunk roads, so far as is practicable, is kept clear of litter and refuse. The relevant district or Local Authority manages litter collection on the rest of the roads in England.

The Department and the Highways Monitor challenge National Highways on litter performance. National Highways is committed to reporting annually on the percentage of the Strategic Road Network which is predominately free of litter, refuse or detritus apart from some small items, in line with the Code of practice on litter and refuse published by Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

National Highways does not have litter enforcement powers on the strategic road network, Local Authorities do have the powers to take forward civil and criminal prosecutions if they have sufficient evidence to do so.

Baroness Vere of Norbiton
Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)