Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many notices of intention under Rule 7(3) have been issued by the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) by local authority in each of the last three year.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Data about how many notices of intention under Rule 7 (3) (by local authority) have been issued, and whether any barring orders have been made, by the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) in each of the last three years could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Data on non-compliance, complaints about non-compliance, or binding orders made, following a decision made by the Tribunal is not held centrally. The Tribunal does not have powers of enforcement over local authorities. Escalation of non-compliance of a Tribunal’s decision is to the Local Authority. If the decision is still not being complied with, this could be escalated to the Local Authority Ombudsman. Guidance about this is provided to appellants.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to (a) Section 51(2) of the Children and Families Act 2014 and (b) the powers of the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) to issue binding orders following appeal hearings, what (i) monitoring and (ii) reporting arrangements on compliance with binding Tribunal orders have been implemented following appeal hearings, broken down by local authority; what formal route of escalation is available to people where rulings relating to those appeal hearings are not implemented; and how many (A) notifications and (B) complaints relating to non-compliance have been received from (1) appellants and (2) local authorities since 2022.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Data about how many notices of intention under Rule 7 (3) (by local authority) have been issued, and whether any barring orders have been made, by the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) in each of the last three years could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Data on non-compliance, complaints about non-compliance, or binding orders made, following a decision made by the Tribunal is not held centrally. The Tribunal does not have powers of enforcement over local authorities. Escalation of non-compliance of a Tribunal’s decision is to the Local Authority. If the decision is still not being complied with, this could be escalated to the Local Authority Ombudsman. Guidance about this is provided to appellants.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what (a) monitoring and (b) reporting arrangements his Department has put in place to ensure that repeated non-compliance by local authorities in the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) is escalated to (i) the Department for Education, (ii) the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, (iii) Ofsted, (iv) the Care Quality Commission and (v) other relevant oversight bodies; and where this information is published.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Data about whether any barring orders have been made by the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) in each of the last three years could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Data on non-compliance, following a decision made by the Tribunal is not held centrally. The Tribunal does not have powers of enforcement over local authorities. Escalation of non-compliance of a Tribunal’s decision is to the Local Authority. If the decision is still not been complied with, this could be escalated to the Local Authority Ombudsman. Guidance about this is provided to appellants.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether any barring orders have been made by the Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal under Rule 8 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) Rules 2008 in each of the last three years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Data about whether any barring orders have been made by the First Tier Tribunal (Health, Education and Social Care Chamber) in each of the last three years could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.
Data on non-compliance, following a decision made by the Tribunal is not held centrally. The Tribunal does not have powers of enforcement over local authorities. Escalation of non-compliance of a Tribunal’s decision is to the Local Authority. If the decision is still not been complied with, this could be escalated to the Local Authority Ombudsman. Guidance about this is provided to appellants.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, whether she has made an assessment the adequacy of the enforcement basis of drop-off charge systems operated by airports; and what steps her Department is taking to help ensure that motorists receive (a) clear and (b) accurate information on (i) airport drop-off charge system enforcement practices and (ii) the authority for issuing any related fines.
Answered by Keir Mather - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The provision and charging of car parking at airports, including drop-off and pick-up charges, is a matter for the airport operator as a commercial business to manage and justify. Any issue relating to car parking charges should be raised with the airport operator directly. However, the Department expects car parking at airports to be managed appropriately and for consumers to be treated fairly, which could include providing information on choices for parking, along with information on how to access them.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with animal welfare groups about the welfare implications of the use of farrowing crates for pigs.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Minister of State (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
I refer the hon. Member to the answer given on 5 September 2025 to the hon. Member for Ashfield, PQ 73693.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what recent steps she has taken to ensure the delivery of Betchwood Vale Academy.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
The department is engaging with local authorities and trusts to advance the development of special and alternative provision free schools, aligned with our vision for the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system.
We are working through these decisions to provide all local authorities with timely updates as quickly as possible.
We continue to be committed to ensuring that all children with SEND receive the support they need to achieve and thrive.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, when her Department plans to publish the Schools White Paper.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
This government is determined to deliver reform that stands the test of time and rebuilds the confidence of families, which is why we’re launching a further period of listening and engagement – testing our proposals with parents, teachers and experts in every region of the country, so that lived experience and partnership are at the heart of our solutions.
We know that families are crying out for change, and that is exactly why it is critical we get this right. We will set out the full Schools White Paper in the new year, building on the work we’ve already done to create a system that’s rooted in inclusion, where children receive high-quality support early on and can thrive at their local school.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to prevent the formation of criminal cash-intensive businesses.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The latest National Risk Assessment, published by this Government in July, highlights the continued threat of cash-based money laundering to the UK. The Government is committed to ensuring cash-intensive businesses such as candy retail stores and barbershops are not exploited by criminals who seek to launder their cash enabling them to profit from their illegal activities.
The Government’s approach to tackling money laundering is set out in the Economic Crime Plan 2 which includes action to disrupt cash-based money laundering and strengthen system wide coordination. The Government, working in partnership with law enforcement and other agencies, is closely monitoring the level of illicit activity in the high street and actively considering whether further systemic interventions are needed to tackle this threat.
Using new powers under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, Companies House is also taking stronger action to monitor and safeguard the company register to ensure accurate information, prevent misuse of the register for economic crime, and build public trust in the UK business environment.
Operationally, in March 2025, the National Economic Crime Centre in the National Crime Agency, coordinated a three-week crackdown against barbershops and other cash intensive businesses involving 19 different police forces and Regional Organised Crime Units, as well as national agencies including HMRC, Trading Standards and Home Office Immigration Enforcement. In total, 380 premises were visited across the three-week operation, with officers securing freezing orders over bank accounts totalling more than £1m, executing 84 warrants and arrested 35 individuals. Officers also seized more than £40,000 in cash, 200,000 cigarettes, 7,000 packs of tobacco, over 8,000 illegal vapes and two vehicles.
This is the first phase of targeted action against criminals and organised crime groups who use high-street businesses to launder criminal monies.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the potential impact of changes to the Covid-19 vaccination eligibility criteria on (a) clinically vulnerable people who qualified for vaccination in Autumn 2024 and (b) levels of hospital capacity during the 2025–26 cold and flu season.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Government’s policy on groups eligible for vaccination programmes is based on the advice of the independent expert body, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI). Over time, the risk from COVID-19 has reduced across the United Kingdom population, through exposure to the virus, changes in the virus and vaccination.
The JCVI carefully considered the latest evidence on the risk of illness, serious disease in specific groups, as well as cost-effectiveness analysis, to provide the Government with advice on the autumn 2025 programme. The evidence indicates that whilst the risk from COVID-19 is now much lower for most people, adults aged 75 years old and over, residents in care homes for older adults, and those who are immunosuppressed are those at highest risk of serious COVID-19 disease. A more targeted vaccination programme, aimed at individuals, with a higher risk of developing serious disease, and where vaccination was considered potentially cost-effective, was advised for autumn 2025.
Whilst current COVID-19 vaccines provide good protection against hospitalisation and/or death for those at highest risk, they provide very limited protection against acquiring COVID-19 infection or mild illness, meaning any potential public health benefit of reducing transmission is much less evident.
Long term health consequences following COVID-19 infection, including post-COVID syndromes, such as long COVID, have been discussed at meetings of the JCVI. It remains uncertain whether getting extra COVID-19 vaccine doses has any effect on the chances of developing long COVID, how it progresses, or how it affects people.
The JCVI has proactively published an updated list of Research Recommendations, encouraging future investigations on the exploration of data and evidence on the benefit of vaccination amongst post-COVID syndromes, and those with underlying medical conditions who are not currently eligible.
The JCVI keeps all vaccination programmes under review. Accordingly, the Government will consider any additional advice from the JCVI in due course. Further information on the details of the modelling and analysis considered are within the 2025 and spring 2026 advice, on the GOV.UK website.
Information is collected on hospital bed occupancy and on the reason for hospital admissions. It is, however, not possible to determine which admissions associated with COVID-19 were for individuals who were eligible for vaccination in autumn 2024 but no longer eligible in autumn 2025.