Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether Jewish schools, synagogues and community centres in Buckinghamshire are eligible for security funding under the Places of Worship Security Fund; and what steps her Department is taking to ensure uptake of that funding in the county.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
The Government remains steadfast in its commitment to the safety and security of Jewish communities, and to tackling antisemitism wherever it manifests. All communities should feel safe to practise their faith and participate in public life free from intimidation or fear.
The Jewish Community Protective Security (JCPS) Grant, administered on behalf of the Home Office by the Community Security Trust (CST), provides funding for protective security measures, such as security personnel services, CCTV and alarm systems, at synagogues, Jewish educational establishments and other communal locations across the United Kingdom, including in Buckinghamshire.
This work sits alongside the Government’s wider package of support for Jewish communities, and our ongoing efforts to tackle antisemitism in all its forms. On 30 April, the Government announced £25 million of immediate funding in 2026/27 to strengthen policing, protect Jewish communities and provide reassurance in response to the awful terrorist attack in Golders Green and the wider spate of antisemitic attacks seen this year. This funding package included an additional £4 million for Jewish community protective security, taking the total available in 2026/27 to a record £32.4 million.
The Home Office does not provide detailed information on funding allocated to individual sites or local areas, as disclosure of such information could inadvertently reveal details about the security needs of specific communities. Nonetheless, the Government continues to work closely with CST, the police and other partners to monitor threats and ensure that effective and proportionate protective measures are in place where they are needed most.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what funding has been allocated through the Jewish Community Protective Security Grant to institutions in Buckinghamshire in each of the last three financial years.
Answered by Angela Eagle - Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
The Government remains steadfast in its commitment to the safety and security of Jewish communities, and to tackling antisemitism wherever it manifests. All communities should feel safe to practise their faith and participate in public life free from intimidation or fear.
The Jewish Community Protective Security (JCPS) Grant, administered on behalf of the Home Office by the Community Security Trust (CST), provides funding for protective security measures, such as security personnel services, CCTV and alarm systems, at synagogues, Jewish educational establishments and other communal locations across the United Kingdom, including in Buckinghamshire.
This work sits alongside the Government’s wider package of support for Jewish communities, and our ongoing efforts to tackle antisemitism in all its forms. On 30 April, the Government announced £25 million of immediate funding in 2026/27 to strengthen policing, protect Jewish communities and provide reassurance in response to the awful terrorist attack in Golders Green and the wider spate of antisemitic attacks seen this year. This funding package included an additional £4 million for Jewish community protective security, taking the total available in 2026/27 to a record £32.4 million.
The Home Office does not provide detailed information on funding allocated to individual sites or local areas, as disclosure of such information could inadvertently reveal details about the security needs of specific communities. Nonetheless, the Government continues to work closely with CST, the police and other partners to monitor threats and ensure that effective and proportionate protective measures are in place where they are needed most.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what consideration he has given to the potential merits of using mobile phone alerts to warn of the dangers of cold water shock in hot weather.
Answered by Sharon Hodgson
Responsibilities for water safety sit with various Government departments and agencies. As part of its “Beat the Heat” campaign, the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) includes a stay safe when swimming section, including links to the Royal Life Saving Society UK’s advice on cold water shock. Further information is available at the following link:
In partnership with the Met Office, UKHSA provides early warning to the health and social care sector, the responder community, the voluntary and community sector, and Government departments through the Weather-Health Alerting System. This happens when adverse temperatures are likely to impact on the health and wellbeing of the population. Further information is available at the following link:
https://ukhsa-dashboard.data.gov.uk/weather-health-alerts
The Cabinet Office is responsible for emergency alerts which are considered for a range of risks under the National Risk Register. Local responders are able to request an emergency alert in their area. The Cabinet Office considers requests on a case-by-case basis.
Emergency alerts will only be issued when they meet the thresholds for use. There must be a risk to life in a defined area, with immediate action for the public to take to keep themselves safe. The criteria have been set intentionally high to avoid alert fatigue.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether she plans to update guidance on handling complaints in children's social care.
Answered by Josh MacAlister - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
The department wants to ensure that the process for children’s social care complaints is effective and straightforward for families to navigate. We also want to ensure that local processes work effectively and efficiently within local authorities, and that the system enables the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman to deliver its independent scrutiny role.
The department will work with the Ombudsman to explore options to streamline the process and improve redress for children and families. This can include better signposting, improved clarity, and promoting clear local information on redress routes. As part of this, we will consider updating guidance as part of our wider work programme across children’s social care.
It is also important that children and young people have access to advocacy when they need it. We will shortly publish updated statutory guidance for local authorities and national standards on effective advocacy for looked-after children, children in need and care leavers.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment his Department has made of trends in changes in waiting times for cases initially to be assigned at the Pensions Ombudsman over the past two years.
Answered by Torsten Bell - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
Waiting times for cases to be initially assigned at The Pensions Ombudsman (TPO) have increased over the past two years, primarily due to sustained growth in demand, alongside a backlog of complex cases. TPO has implemented an Operating Model Review to improve efficiency and throughput, which has increased case closures and begun to stabilise waiting times.
However, waiting times for assignment, particularly for more complex cases, remain longer than desired.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what data his Department holds on average waiting times for (a) cases to be assigned and (b) decisions by the Pensions Ombudsman.
Answered by Torsten Bell - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Department does not centrally publish formal averages for case allocation or final decisions by the Pensions Ombudsman (TPO). However, TPO’s latest performance updates indicate that waiting times remain significant due to sustained demand. Recent data shows cases can wait around 15 months to be allocated at assessment stage and up to 18 months for adjudication in more complex cases.
For all closures delivered in 2025/26 the average length of time from case creation to closure was 8 months.
The Department is working closely with TPO, including providing additional funding and supporting its Operating Model Review programme, to improve efficiency and reduce waiting times.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his department has made of the American '988' Suicide and Crisis Lifeline model, and whether there are plans to develop a similarly integrated crisis line here.
Answered by Preet Kaur Gill
The Department of Health and Social Care has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of the Operating Model Review in reducing waiting times at The Pensions Ombudsman over the past year.
Answered by Torsten Bell - Parliamentary Secretary (HM Treasury)
The Pensions Ombudsman’s (TPO) Operating Model Review (OMR) has delivered record case closures in both 2024/25 and 2025/26.
Key changes introduced through the OMR include ensuring that individuals complete the formal complaints process with their pension provider before approaching TPO; introducing expedited decision-making that closes cases with clear outcomes earlier in the process, reducing waiting times in these cases by as much as 18 months; and adopting a lead case approach where a structural issue with a pension scheme affects multiple members.
By continuing to implement operational innovations and utilising new resource from DWP, TPO will sustain its efforts to reduce case waiting times, which I recognise remain too long.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of the withdrawal of previously granted Enterprise Investment Scheme relief on investor confidence.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Economic Secretary (HM Treasury)
This Government is focused on making the UK the best place to start and scale a business. That’s why at Budget 2025 we announced the doubling of investment limits and gross asset thresholds for the Enterprise Investment Scheme (EIS) and Venture Capital Trust Schemes and expanded eligibility for the Enterprise Management Incentive Scheme.
In respect of EIS, HMRC applies the legislation to the facts of each case, including after and investment is made.
Asked by: Sarah Green (Liberal Democrat - Chesham and Amersham)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department plans to introduce retrospective funding for schools that met special educational needs support costs during periods when Education, Health and Care Plan assessments were delayed by local authorities beyond the statutory deadline.
Answered by Georgia Gould - Minister of State (Education)
Mainstream schools are currently expected to meet the costs of supporting their pupils with special educational needs (SEN), up to £6,000 per pupil per annum. When the costs of additional support required for a pupil with SEN exceed that £6,000 threshold, the local authority should allocate additional top-up funding to cover the excess costs. This funding comes from the authority’s high needs budget. This may follow a statutory assessment producing an education, health and care (EHC) plan, though local authorities have the discretion to provide high needs funding to schools for pupils without an EHC plan, including those whose EHC needs assessment has been delayed.
Following the publication of the Schools White Paper, we are consulting on a range of reforms to enable mainstream schools to be inclusive of children with SEN, and are providing £4 billion over the next three years to prioritise early intervention and drive forward the reforms.