Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what steps he is able to take to respond to economic coercion from other countries.
Answered by Chris Bryant - Minister of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The UK is well prepared to respond to economic coercion and has a strong and flexible toolkit to defend its interests. We can act through diplomatic engagement, international dispute mechanisms, and cooperation with allies, including the G7. We also retain the ability to use trade and non‑trade measures, consistent with international rules, to address unfair trading practices and protect UK businesses. Alongside this, we are strengthening economic resilience by supporting businesses to diversify markets and supply chains, and by continuing to reform and enhance our trade defence and remedies framework, including through seeking views on new powers to respond to economic pressure.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with her counterpart in Iraq on the rights of religious minorities in that country.
Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided on 3 October 2025 in response to Question 75586.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, when security and defence arrangements were last assessed for each of the overseas territories.
Answered by Al Carns - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence) (Minister for Veterans)
The UK maintains credible contingency plans for the Overseas Territories, and has strategically located bases in Gibraltar, the Falkland Islands, Ascension Island, the Sovereign Base Areas on the island of Cyprus, and the joint UK/US base on Diego Garcia. These plans are kept under review to ensure they are commensurate to the threat.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps her Department will be taking to prevent establishments licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 from keeping animals in sub-standard facilities.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
All licenced establishments must meet the minimum required standards for care and accommodation, as set out in the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-for-the-housing-and-care-of-animals-bred-supplied-or-used-for-scientific-purposes).
The Home Office Regulator conducts both announced and unannounced audits to assure establishments’ compliance with the required standards in the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, the Code of Practice and their individual licence conditions.
In confirmed cases of non-compliance, the Regulator applies remedies aimed at minimising the risk of future recurrence, in line with its compliance policy (https://www.gov.uk/guidance/animal-testing-and-research-compliance-with-aspa). The Regulator will continue to publish all cases of non-compliance in its Annual Reports, where it considers root causes of and key learnings from non-compliance and makes recommendations to reduce future risk. (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/animals-in-science-regulation-unit-annual-reports).
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to page 37 of the Animals in Science Regulation Unit Annual Report 2024, published in December 2025, what specific issues the item "significant issues of concern regarding farm and large animal facilities" refers to.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
All licensed establishments must uphold the standards for animal welfare set out in ASPA and in the Code of Practice for the Housing and Care of Animals Bred, Supplied or Used for Scientific Purposes. The Animals in Science Regulation Unit (ASRU) takes instances of potential non-compliance very seriously and thoroughly investigates all non-compliance concerns.
ASRU publishes an annual report that sets out all confirmed non‑compliance cases along with any enforcement actions taken (https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/animals-in-science-regulation-unit#annual-reports).
With reference to page 37 of the ASRU Annual Report 2024, the item “significant issues of concern regarding farm and large animal facilities” refers specifically to a breach of Establishment Licence Standard Condition 4.7. This condition requires licence holders to maintain standards of care and accommodation set out in the Code of Practice available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/code-of-practice-for-the-housing-and-care-of-animals-bred-supplied-or-used-for-scientific-purposes.
ASRU’s published Compliance Policy (www.gov.uk/guidance/animal-testing-and-research-compliance-with-aspa) provides information on how the regulator identifies, investigates and responds to potential incidents of non‑compliance, and how proportionate measures and sanctions are applied where breaches are found which seek to prevent future recurrence.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Animals in Science Regulation Unit Annual Report 2024, published in December 2025, what were the reasons for three establishment licences being revoked.
Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Cabinet Office)
The Animals in Science Regulation Unit Annual Report is the regulator’s public account of its work overseeing the use of animals in science under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. It includes information on licensing, compliance activity and enforcement outcomes to provide transparency and assurance about the operation of the regulatory framework.
The three establishment licences reported as revoked in 2024 were withdrawn because the establishments had stopped conducting regulated procedures under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. In such cases, licence revocation is an administrative step, confirming that an establishment is no longer required to maintain a licence.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what information she holds on the reasons for China’s recent mobilisation of fishing boats to form floating barriers.
Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We are aware of media reporting regarding a recent mobilisation of Chinese fishing vessels in the East China Sea. The UK has enduring interests in the Indo-Pacific and is committed to maintaining regional security and stability. We are committed to international law, the primacy of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and to freedom of navigation and overflight.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many a) US military personnel and b) their dependents and spouses are stationed in the UK.
Answered by Al Carns - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence) (Minister for Veterans)
There are approximately 12,300 United States Military and Civilian Defence personnel in the UK at various defence sites and 11,300 dependants and spouses.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will write to the hon. Member for Slough outlining (a) why the High Court of Justice King’s Bench Division Administrative Court has been (i) writing to the hon. Member for Slough and (ii) sending him sealed court orders regarding a court case to which he is not a party, (b) why this has continued after correspondence from his office, (c) whether all parties for this case are aware of (A) this case and (B) the orders relating to it, (d) whether all parties for this case are aware that the hon. Member for Slough has been sent this information and (e) whether, if required, the Information Commissioner's Office will be informed.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) processed the claim accurately and in accordance with the information provided by the claimant.
HMCTS has advised that the hon. Member for Slough’s parliamentary email address was included on the claim form by the claimant to the proceedings as the contact address for the Second Defendant. As a result, this was added to the court database and would generate court correspondence including court orders to the hon. Member’s parliamentary email address.
HMCTS received an email from the MP’s office on 29 December 2025 and the court issued a response to him on the same day. The MP continued to receive correspondence because his office did not specify that the email address should be removed. The court would usually require notification and evidence that an administrative error has been made so the individual's details can be removed from the court record.
Documents were sent to the hon. Member for Slough who is not a party to this case rather than to the second defendant. HMCTS has corrected this and is ensuring service on the second defendant and will notify all parties.
This is not a matter for the Information Commissioners Office as HMCTS has followed the process and accurately recorded the claim details from the claimant’s form.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what checks are undertaken to ensure Hon Members and other individuals are not sent court orders to which (a) they are not party and (b) have sensitive personal information of others.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) processed the claim accurately and in accordance with the information provided by the claimant.
HMCTS has advised that the hon. Member for Slough’s parliamentary email address was included on the claim form by the claimant to the proceedings as the contact address for the Second Defendant. As a result, this was added to the court database and would generate court correspondence including court orders to the hon. Member’s parliamentary email address.
HMCTS received an email from the MP’s office on 29 December 2025 and the court issued a response to him on the same day. The MP continued to receive correspondence because his office did not specify that the email address should be removed. The court would usually require notification and evidence that an administrative error has been made so the individual's details can be removed from the court record.
Documents were sent to the hon. Member for Slough who is not a party to this case rather than to the second defendant. HMCTS has corrected this and is ensuring service on the second defendant and will notify all parties.
This is not a matter for the Information Commissioners Office as HMCTS has followed the process and accurately recorded the claim details from the claimant’s form.