Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department is taking to tackle ticket fraud linked to online ticket resale platforms.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office) (Security) (Jointly with the Cabinet Office)

The Government is committed to tackling all forms of fraud, including ticket fraud linked to online ticket resale platforms, and to holding those who profit from such criminal activity to account.

Under the Online Safety Act, in-scope online services are required to take proactive steps to prevent fraudulent content appearing on their platforms and to remove it swiftly when they become aware of it. This includes fraudulent advertisements and listings offering fake tickets for sale through online platforms and services. Ofcom is responsible for regulating compliance with these duties and has powers to take enforcement action where necessary.

More broadly, the Government is working with law enforcement, industry partners and consumer protection organisations to disrupt fraud, protect the public and support victims. The Stop! Think Fraud campaign also provides practical advice to help people identify fraud and take steps to protect themselves from scams, including those involving online ticket sales.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of the difference between upfront grid connection costs in the UK and equivalent sites in other European countries on industrial investment decisions.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

This government is committed to supporting industrial investment in Great Britain, although responsibility for the connection charging regulatory framework falls to Ofgem. To reduce barriers to investment, Ofgem recently consulted on proposals to move away from the current securities regime for demand users, which requires all transmission costs to be securitised up front, to a milestones-based regime. Ofgem will publish its decision on this in due course.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps she is taking to ensure that NHS bodies consistently identify and implement reasonable adjustments to communication preferences, including where patients require written communication rather than telephone contact as a result of (a) disability and (b) complex health conditions.

Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

NHS England is working to support implementation of the revised Accessible Information Standard, published on 30 June 2025, to help ensure that the communication needs of people with a disability, impairment, or sensory loss are met in health and care provision. More information is available at the following link:

https://www.england.nhs.uk/accessible-information-standard/

The responsibility for monitoring compliance with the Accessible Information Standard sits with the commissioner of the service.

Information on NHS England’s approach to patient communications, including accessibility and inclusion, is available at the following link:

https://digital.nhs.uk/about-nhs-digital/digital-first-messaging#accessibility-and-inclusion-is-a-priority

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that reasonable adjustments relating to (a) disabled and (b) vulnerable claimants' communication needs, including where written communications may be required in preference to telephone calls, are identified and adhered to.

Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)

The department offers a wide range of reasonable adjustments for claimants, including production of communications in a range of different (or alternative) formats to ensure that information is presented in an accessible way that suits their needs. Alternative formats offered include Braille, large print, audio, coloured paper, and screen-readable formats such as word and web-accessible PDF.

Once a claimant’s communication need or reasonable adjustment requirement has been identified, it is recorded on the claimant's record in such a way that it is easily seen each time a member of staff looks at that record, helping to ensure ongoing engagement remains appropriate to the claimant's circumstances.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps HM Courts and Tribunals Service takes to ensure that reasonable adjustments and communication preferences are identified, recorded and adhered to throughout court and tribunal proceedings involving disabled and vulnerable users.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

HMCTS has a legal duty under the Equality Act 2010 to ensure all our users are treated with dignity and that we do not discriminate against people with protected characteristics. HMCTS will provide reasonable adjustments for court and tribunal users with disabilities.

We encourage court and tribunal users to contact us before a hearing to discuss any adjustments they may need. HMCTS staff should sensitively ask those needing reasonable adjustments what support they require in order to be able to provide such adjustments.

Information about how we provide reasonable adjustments is available on GOV.UK.

Users may ask for HMCTS leaflets, blank forms, and any documents relating to their case in an alternative format that meets their specific accessibility needs such as, Braille, audio, large print, Easy Read and other alternate formats.

Where a party to proceedings is identified as having additional communication needs, they or their legal representative may request the support of an intermediary. Intermediaries assess and advise on the specific communication requirements of a person and recommend reasonable adjustments to enable their participation in hearings.

We also have mandatory reasonable adjustments teaching for staff to help them understand what reasonable adjustments are and how they should be put in place to support disabled court and tribunal users.

Requests for reasonable adjustments may be recorded on our case management system which helps staff manage requests and track reasonable adjustments which have been provided.

HMCTS is improving how reasonable adjustments are requested and managed within digital services in the Civil, Family and Tribunals jurisdictions. This includes proactively asking service users for their support needs within their journey, and improvements to case management systems to make it easier for staff to manage and deliver the adjustments.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what estimate her Department has made of the number of industrial electrification projects that are abandoned before they reach a formal grid connection application.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

The Government recognises that addressing barriers to electrification is critical to ensuring electrification is commercially viable and investable at scale.

We continue to engage with viable industrial electrification projects and understand that the grid connection process itself presents a barrier for some sites obtaining a formal grid connection.

Ofgem has initiated an end-to-end review, a comprehensive regulatory overhaul designed to improve the UK's electricity grid connections process. DESNZ continues to engage with Ofgem on the end-to-end as well as NESO on its Connections Reform work, to improve the grid connection process for industrial users.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what steps she plans to take to ensure that distribution network operators provide an estimate of grid connection costs before a business spends time or money on the formal application process.

Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

Businesses can access information on estimated connection costs, ahead of submitting a connection application, either via a Budget Estimate or ‘self-serve’ online tools. Information is available on distribution network operator websites for example AutoDesign | Northern Powergrid.

Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, a) how many people in Washington and Gateshead South receive Personal Independence Payment (PIP); b) how many PIP claimants are there per ward in the constituency.

Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government) (Equalities)

Information on the number of PIP claimants by constituency and ward is available via Stat-Xplore.

Select the dataset ‘PIP Cases with Entitlement from 2019’. Under the ‘Geography’ folder, expand the ‘Westminster Parliamentary Constituency’ tab to select the desired constituency, or the ‘National – Regional – LA – Ward’ tab to select the desired wards. Then select ‘Retrieve Data’.

You can log in or access Stat-Xplore as a guest user. Guidance on how to use Stat-Xplore is also available here: Personal Independence Payment data on Stat-Xplore: user guide - GOV.UK.

Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:

To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether her Department plans to (a) incorporate the potential for industrial electrification into its industrial strategy to (i) protect jobs and (ii) support economic growth, and (b) ensure that the grid connection process does not act as a barrier to these goals.

Answered by Blair McDougall - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade) (Jointly with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)

This government is committed to supporting UK industry, including to take advantage of new opportunities that can promote competitiveness, economic growth and resilience. Clean energy is at the heart of this transition, and decarbonising via electrification will unlock investment, reduce industry’s reliance on volatile fossil fuels and protect thousands of jobs in regions across the UK.

The Government recognises that addressing key barriers to electrification is critical to ensuring it is commercially viable and investable at scale. This includes grid constraints and connection delays, which can weaken the investment case for electrification

The National Energy System Operator (NESO) is the independent, publicly owned body responsible for planning and operating Great Britain's electricity and gas transmission systems. We are working closely with Ofgem, the Electricity System Operator and network companies to accelerate network connections.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many women have received full mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021, in comparison to partial removals.

Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Surgery for patients experiencing complications associated with vaginal mesh is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient Decision Aids (PDAs) developed alongside NICE guideline NG123, titled Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management.

The PDAs describe a range of management options, including both partial mesh removal and complete mesh removal where clinically appropriate. They recognise that complete mesh removal may not always be technically feasible or clinically appropriate, depending on the type, location, and extent of the mesh, and that some patients may require further surgery following an initial partial removal if symptoms persist.

According to data from the Hospital Episode Statistics, 234 episodes of total removal of vaginal mesh and 185 episodes of partial removal of vaginal mesh were recorded from 2021/22 to 2025/26.

Information on how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021 is not held centrally.

In April 2026, NICE reviewed its guideline NG123 and concluded that there was insufficient new evidence to warrant changes to the relevant recommendations. It is aware of ongoing reviews into the care of mesh-harmed women and will consider any impact on its recommendations once outcomes are published.

The sample audit of the POP/SUI database has been completed and it has been used to inform future commissioning of services.

The specification for complications of mesh inserted for urinary incontinence, vaginal or internal, and external rectal prolapse states that specialised mesh centres must use trust appraisal systems to ensure that surgeons are appropriately trained, current in their practice, that they adhere to clinical and NICE guidance, comply with Pelvic Floor Registry data requirements, and report any complications.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether mesh removal surgeons receive an approved and accredited training course for removals.

Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Surgery for patients experiencing complications associated with vaginal mesh is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient Decision Aids (PDAs) developed alongside NICE guideline NG123, titled Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management.

The PDAs describe a range of management options, including both partial mesh removal and complete mesh removal where clinically appropriate. They recognise that complete mesh removal may not always be technically feasible or clinically appropriate, depending on the type, location, and extent of the mesh, and that some patients may require further surgery following an initial partial removal if symptoms persist.

According to data from the Hospital Episode Statistics, 234 episodes of total removal of vaginal mesh and 185 episodes of partial removal of vaginal mesh were recorded from 2021/22 to 2025/26.

Information on how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021 is not held centrally.

In April 2026, NICE reviewed its guideline NG123 and concluded that there was insufficient new evidence to warrant changes to the relevant recommendations. It is aware of ongoing reviews into the care of mesh-harmed women and will consider any impact on its recommendations once outcomes are published.

The sample audit of the POP/SUI database has been completed and it has been used to inform future commissioning of services.

The specification for complications of mesh inserted for urinary incontinence, vaginal or internal, and external rectal prolapse states that specialised mesh centres must use trust appraisal systems to ensure that surgeons are appropriately trained, current in their practice, that they adhere to clinical and NICE guidance, comply with Pelvic Floor Registry data requirements, and report any complications.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021.

Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Surgery for patients experiencing complications associated with vaginal mesh is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient Decision Aids (PDAs) developed alongside NICE guideline NG123, titled Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management.

The PDAs describe a range of management options, including both partial mesh removal and complete mesh removal where clinically appropriate. They recognise that complete mesh removal may not always be technically feasible or clinically appropriate, depending on the type, location, and extent of the mesh, and that some patients may require further surgery following an initial partial removal if symptoms persist.

According to data from the Hospital Episode Statistics, 234 episodes of total removal of vaginal mesh and 185 episodes of partial removal of vaginal mesh were recorded from 2021/22 to 2025/26.

Information on how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021 is not held centrally.

In April 2026, NICE reviewed its guideline NG123 and concluded that there was insufficient new evidence to warrant changes to the relevant recommendations. It is aware of ongoing reviews into the care of mesh-harmed women and will consider any impact on its recommendations once outcomes are published.

The sample audit of the POP/SUI database has been completed and it has been used to inform future commissioning of services.

The specification for complications of mesh inserted for urinary incontinence, vaginal or internal, and external rectal prolapse states that specialised mesh centres must use trust appraisal systems to ensure that surgeons are appropriately trained, current in their practice, that they adhere to clinical and NICE guidance, comply with Pelvic Floor Registry data requirements, and report any complications.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what work has been done in collaboration with international experts to reach a consensus on whether full or partial removals are best for mesh-harmed women; and whether NICE is actively monitoring this situation and will update its guidance when consensus is reached.

Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Surgery for patients experiencing complications associated with vaginal mesh is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient Decision Aids (PDAs) developed alongside NICE guideline NG123, titled Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management.

The PDAs describe a range of management options, including both partial mesh removal and complete mesh removal where clinically appropriate. They recognise that complete mesh removal may not always be technically feasible or clinically appropriate, depending on the type, location, and extent of the mesh, and that some patients may require further surgery following an initial partial removal if symptoms persist.

According to data from the Hospital Episode Statistics, 234 episodes of total removal of vaginal mesh and 185 episodes of partial removal of vaginal mesh were recorded from 2021/22 to 2025/26.

Information on how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021 is not held centrally.

In April 2026, NICE reviewed its guideline NG123 and concluded that there was insufficient new evidence to warrant changes to the relevant recommendations. It is aware of ongoing reviews into the care of mesh-harmed women and will consider any impact on its recommendations once outcomes are published.

The sample audit of the POP/SUI database has been completed and it has been used to inform future commissioning of services.

The specification for complications of mesh inserted for urinary incontinence, vaginal or internal, and external rectal prolapse states that specialised mesh centres must use trust appraisal systems to ensure that surgeons are appropriately trained, current in their practice, that they adhere to clinical and NICE guidance, comply with Pelvic Floor Registry data requirements, and report any complications.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what progress has been made on commissioning a retrospective sample audit of the POP/SUI database to work out the risk percentage of mesh complication experienced by women.

Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Surgery for patients experiencing complications associated with vaginal mesh is supported by National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patient Decision Aids (PDAs) developed alongside NICE guideline NG123, titled Urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse in women: management.

The PDAs describe a range of management options, including both partial mesh removal and complete mesh removal where clinically appropriate. They recognise that complete mesh removal may not always be technically feasible or clinically appropriate, depending on the type, location, and extent of the mesh, and that some patients may require further surgery following an initial partial removal if symptoms persist.

According to data from the Hospital Episode Statistics, 234 episodes of total removal of vaginal mesh and 185 episodes of partial removal of vaginal mesh were recorded from 2021/22 to 2025/26.

Information on how many mesh removal surgeons are performing mesh removals since the setting up of the nine specialist removal centres in 2021 is not held centrally.

In April 2026, NICE reviewed its guideline NG123 and concluded that there was insufficient new evidence to warrant changes to the relevant recommendations. It is aware of ongoing reviews into the care of mesh-harmed women and will consider any impact on its recommendations once outcomes are published.

The sample audit of the POP/SUI database has been completed and it has been used to inform future commissioning of services.

The specification for complications of mesh inserted for urinary incontinence, vaginal or internal, and external rectal prolapse states that specialised mesh centres must use trust appraisal systems to ensure that surgeons are appropriately trained, current in their practice, that they adhere to clinical and NICE guidance, comply with Pelvic Floor Registry data requirements, and report any complications.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what estimate her Department has made of the (a) prevalence of respiratory disease and (b) number of emergency hospital admissions for respiratory conditions in Washington and Gateshead South constituency compared with national averages.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

Data is available for emergency finished admission episodes (FAEs) where there was a primary diagnosis of 'respiratory conditions’. The following table shows the number of FAEs where there was a primary diagnosis of 'respiratory conditions’ for Washington and Gateshead South and England, for activity in English National Health Service hospitals and English NHS-commissioned activity in the independent sector, for 2024/25 and provisionally for 2025/26:

Available data on trends in respiratory conditions can be found on the Department’s Fingertips website. Data is not available by parliamentary constituency. Data is available at regional, county, unitary authority and integrated care board level and information for Gateshead is available at the following link:

https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/search/Respiratory#page/1/gid/1/pat/15/ati/502/are/E08000037/iid/90933/age/314/sex/4/cat/-1/ctp/-1/yrr/1/cid/4/tbm/1

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what her Department’s timeline is for deciding on the second wave of Modern Service Frameworks; and whether respiratory conditions will be considered.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

For the time being, I refer the Hon. Member to the answer that she provided on 17 July in response to Question 17694, but I will ensure that she is updated when there is further progress to report.

Found: Letter from Baroness Walmsley, Chair of the Childhood Vaccinations Committee to Sharon Hodgson MP, Parliamentary

Found: Food and Weight Management Sharon Hodgson MP, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health

Found: Yours sincerely Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts Sharon Hodgson

Found: Sharon Hodgson MP Dear Ms Layla Moran, Joint letter: For the Committee's forthcoming report

Found: From Sharon Hodgson MP Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health and Prevention

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment she has made of the implications for her Department's policies of the report by the APPG on Spinal Cord Injury entitled Fragmented to Coordinated: Building a National Strategy for Spinal Cord Injury, published in November 202; and whether national coordination and oversight for spinal cord injury will continue.

Answered by James Frith - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

My predecessor, Sharon Hodgson, met with the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Spinal Cord Injuries and the Spinal Injuries Association in April to discuss the findings of the APPG report.

Regarding the question of where responsibility for the commissioning of spinal cord injury services will sit, I refer the Hon. Member to the answer provided on 19 August in response to Question 14177.

Found: to discuss the bill, the Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Sharon Hodgson