Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what discussions her Department has had with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the potential merits of introducing (a) specific criminal offences and (b) criminal sanctions for using catapults to harm animals.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
In view of the ongoing concerns about the misuse of catapults, especially against wildlife, I have written to Dan Zeichner MP, the relevant Minister in DEFRA, who has responsibility for the protection of animals and birds.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, how many incidents of the use of catapults causing harm to wild mammals have been recorded in each of the last five years.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Government takes wildlife crime seriously. Defra supports the National Wildlife Crime Unit (NWCU), which helps prevent and detect wildlife crime by obtaining and disseminating intelligence, undertaking analysis which highlights local or national threats and directly assisting law enforcers in their investigations. Defra is providing £424,000 for NWCU in the financial year 2025-2026.
However, crimes against wildlife using catapults are not ‘notifiable’. This means police forces are not required to record and report figures on this type of crime to the Home Office for statistical and monitoring purposes. Defra therefore holds no official statistics on the number of incidents of the use of catapults causing harm to wild mammals from the last five years. Any decision to make such wildlife offences notifiable sits with the Home Office rather than Defra. Regardless of notifiable status, when it comes to responding to the most prevalent wildlife crimes, police force Chief Constables have operational independence to tackle the crimes that matter most to their communities.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment her Department has made of the impact of the legal (a) sale and (b) possession of catapults on animal welfare.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects all wild birds and some wild animals in England and Wales. While it does not specifically include catapults in the list of weapons that must not be used to kill wildlife, it is still illegal to deliberately attempt to kill, injure, or harm protected species, whether by using a catapult or any other harm-causing device. There are a range of other offences found in further legislation to protect wildlife from cruelty such as the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. Where pets and livestock are concerned, it is an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the sentences available for the most serious cases of animal cruelty by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.
The Government takes crimes against animals seriously. While Defra is keeping the law in this area under review, existing powers are already available for the police to tackle the misuse of catapults and there are therefore no current plans for further assessment of the legal (a) sale and (b) possession of catapults.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to address the use of catapults in causing suffering to (a) pets and (b) wild mammals.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects all wild birds and some wild animals in England and Wales. While it does not specifically include catapults in the list of weapons that must not be used to kill wildlife, it is still illegal to deliberately attempt to kill, injure, or harm protected species, whether by using a catapult or any other harm-causing device. There are a range of other offences found in further legislation to protect wildlife from cruelty such as the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. Where pets and livestock are concerned, it is an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the sentences available for the most serious cases of animal cruelty by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.
The Government takes crimes against animals seriously. While Defra is keeping the law in this area under review, existing powers are already available for the police to tackle the misuse of catapults and there are therefore no current plans for further assessment of the legal (a) sale and (b) possession of catapults.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether his Department has any plans to review the regulation of catapults in relation to animal welfare concerns.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects all wild birds and some wild animals in England and Wales. While it does not specifically include catapults in the list of weapons that must not be used to kill wildlife, it is still illegal to deliberately attempt to kill, injure, or harm protected species, whether by using a catapult or any other harm-causing device. There are a range of other offences found in further legislation to protect wildlife from cruelty such as the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. Where pets and livestock are concerned, it is an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the sentences available for the most serious cases of animal cruelty by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.
The Government takes crimes against animals seriously. While Defra is keeping the law in this area under review, existing powers are already available for the police to tackle the misuse of catapults and there are therefore no current plans for further assessment of the legal (a) sale and (b) possession of catapults.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department has plans to review the regulation of (a) hand-held catapults and (b) slingshots with a wrist-brace attachment.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
I have asked Home Office officials to keep the law in this area under review. There are existing powers available for the police to tackle the misuse of catapults for anti-social behaviour or against people or property.
I understand that there is a particular concern about the misuse of catapults against wildlife. I have therefore written to Dan Zeichner MP, the relevant Minister in DEFRA, which has responsibility for the law protecting animals and birds to highlight this problem.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of legislation for (a) deterring and (b) prosecuting people who attack (i) wildlife and (ii) livestock with catapults; and whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of bringing forward legislative proposals to help tackle this.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 protects all wild birds and some wild animals in England and Wales. While it does not specifically include catapults in the list of weapons that must not be used to kill wildlife, it is still illegal to deliberately attempt to kill, injure, or harm protected species. There are a range of other offences found in further legislation to protect wildlife from cruelty such as the Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996. Where livestock is concerned, it is an offence under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 to cause an animal any unnecessary suffering. The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Act 2021 increased the sentences available for the most serious cases of animal cruelty by increasing the maximum penalty for this offence to 5 years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine.
The Government takes crimes against animals seriously but there is already sufficient legislation in place which protects them from targeted use of catapults. Defra therefore has no current plans to take further steps to tackle the use of catapults and nor does the Home Office have plans to change the law to make a catapult a specified prohibited weapon.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people had their claim rejected for (a) Universal Credit, (b) the State Pension and (c) other public funds due to having a no recourse to public funds condition in each year since 2020.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Persons subject to immigration control have no recourse to public funds and so cannot access taxpayer-funded benefits such as Universal Credit. Nationals of countries other than the UK and Ireland may have no recourse to public funds because either their immigration status prohibits this or they do not have an immigration status.
The table below gives the number of individuals who have been assessed as ineligible for public funds benefit due to being a ‘Person Subject to Immigration Control’, i.e. having No Recourse to Public Funds from April 2022 onwards (data is not held prior to this period). An individual can be a ‘Person Subject to Immigration control’ due to the conditions of their immigration status or because they have no immigration status.
Date Decision Entered on Admin System | Number of UC HRT ‘Person Subject to Immigration Control’ (i.e. No Recourse to Public Funds) Decisions |
April 2022 to March 2023 | 26,000 |
April 2023 to March 2024 | 35,000 |
April 2024 to March 2025 | 38,000 |
Source: DWP internal analysis of UC Dataworks tables, Rounded to the nearest 1,000 decisions.
Equivalent information for non-Universal Credit benefits is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.
The new State Pension is based on National Insurance contributions and payments are not classified as public funds for immigration purposes. Entitlement for any payments of the new State Pension is usually dependent on the individual having a minimum of ten qualifying years of National Insurance when they reach State Pension age.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have had their indefinite leave to remain claim rejected because they have applied to lift no recourse to public funds.
Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)
A person applying for settlement in the UK must meet several requirements. Not meeting those requirements will result in a refusal. Having their no recourse to public funds restriction lifted is not currently one of those requirements, so no one should have been refused on this basis.
Asked by: Helen Whately (Conservative - Faversham and Mid Kent)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people have asked for their no recourse to public funds to be lifted in each year since 2020.
Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)
Quarterly data regarding NRPF - Destitution Change of Conditions Applications and Outcomes is published in tabs CoC_01 – CoC_07 of the Immigration and protection data: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-and-protection-data-q4-2024