Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Scotland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland, whether he has had discussions with the Secretary of State for Defence on the potential merits of a public inquiry into the Mull of Kintyre Chinook crash in June 1994.
Answered by Douglas Alexander - Secretary of State for Scotland
On this 30th anniversary of the terrible tragedy of the Mull of Kintyre Chinook crash, our thoughts remain with the families of those who lost their lives, and with all the communities affected by that devastating loss.
I welcome the engagement that took place in December 2025, when representatives from the Chinook Justice Campaign met with three Ministry of Defence Ministers and the Victims' Minister.
The Honourable Member will be aware that this matter is now subject to ongoing legal proceedings. The UK Government is committed to engaging fully in that process, and I hope she will understand that I am not able to comment further until that work has concluded.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to her Answer of 25 February to Question 113532, how many exporters and brokers issued with a warning notice have subsequently come into compliance and provided the post-shipment information required.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency (EA) does not currently record information on a central system or in a way that allows it to identify how many exporters and brokers issued with a warning notice have come into compliance. The EA is updating its processes to enable this information to be captured in future.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to the Answer of 25 February 2026 to Question 113532, how many exporters or brokers who have failed to comply with the requirement to provide post shipment information within the revised sixteen week deadline have been issued with a prohibition or stop notice by the Environment Agency.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
As of 5 June 2026, the Environment Agency has issued seven prohibition notices to exporters that failed to comply with the requirement to provide post-shipment information within the revised sixteen-week deadline.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to her answer of the 20th April 2026 to Question UIN 124082, how many of the 3277 shipments referenced in her response as having taken place between the 28th October 2025 and 2nd February 2026 had a) exceeded the sixteen week deadline for the submission of post-shipment information as of the 30th April 2026 and b) of that number how many have not supplied geo-tagged photographic information within the sixteen week window.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency received post-shipment information for 2,503 of 3,315 shipments. This amendment to the total is because of shipments being initially reported which were out of scope. All of the 812 late submissions have been followed up with the exporter.
1,059 of the 2,503 shipments have not supplied geo-tagged photos, but have provided alternative evidence to demonstrate that material had been correctly received.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to her answer of the 20th April 2026 to Question UIN 124082, how many of the 533 shipments referenced in her response as having taken place between the 28th October 2025 and 2nd February 2026, which had exceeded the sixteen week deadline for the submission of post-shipment information by the 30th March 2026 and had provided incomplete information, and were therefore deemed non-compliant, have subsequently provided additional post shipment information including geo-tagged evidence in the form required.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency’s (EA) data is maintained as a rolling operational dataset. The EA is currently unable to identify how many of the shipments that were non-compliant in this period are now compliant. Collating it within the time available would incur disproportionate cost as each shipment would have to be checked manually.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, with reference to her answer of the 20th April 2026 to Question UIN 124082, how many of the 548 shipments referenced in her response as having taken place between the 28th October 2025 and 2nd February 2026 which had exceeded the sixteen week deadline for the submission of post-shipment information by the 30th March 2026 but had failed to provide any information have subsequently provided the post shipment information required.
Answered by Mary Creagh - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Environment Agency (EA) has now received post‑shipment information for 531 of the 548 shipments. The EA is now following up with the exporters of the remaining 17 shipments to ensure that the material has been taken to an appropriate facility.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, on how many occasions have documents relating to incidents, accidents, near misses and criminal activity have been closed to the public for 100 years, in each of the last ten years.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) records over the last ten years have been closed to the public for up to 100 years to protect personal information or where it is assessed that disclosure would give rise to specific risks or sensitivities.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what (a) oversight, (b) involvement, (c) responsibility and (d) accountability he has have for decisions relating to the closure of documents to the public for any period of time.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
In accordance with the statutory Code of Practice on the management of records, Ministry of Defence (MOD) Ministers have the authority to make a final decision on the closure (and continued closure) of records. However day-to-day management of Defence records (including the application of closure periods) is delegated to authorised MOD officials operating under the authority of the Departmental Records Officer, who ensures Departmental compliance with its statutory obligations under the Public Records Act 1958. Decisions on the closure of documents take into account sensitivities such as national security, personal data, and operational considerations.
For personal information and information linked to identifiable living individuals, the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives advocate a closure period of the ‘lifetime’ of the data subject. This assumes a lifetime of 100 years but will be graduated from the age or assumed age of the youngest individual in the record.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what oversight, involvement, responsibility and accountability Ministers have for decisions relating to the closure of documents to the public for 100 years.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
In accordance with the statutory Code of Practice on the management of records, Ministry of Defence (MOD) Ministers have the authority to make a final decision on the closure (and continued closure) of records. However day-to-day management of Defence records (including the application of closure periods) is delegated to authorised MOD officials operating under the authority of the Departmental Records Officer, who ensures Departmental compliance with its statutory obligations under the Public Records Act 1958. Decisions on the closure of documents take into account sensitivities such as national security, personal data, and operational considerations.
For personal information and information linked to identifiable living individuals, the Advisory Council on National Records and Archives advocate a closure period of the ‘lifetime’ of the data subject. This assumes a lifetime of 100 years but will be graduated from the age or assumed age of the youngest individual in the record.
Asked by: Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat - Wells and Mendip Hills)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether any documents relating to the (a) Chinook Air Crash on 2 June 1994 and to (b) Mk 2 Chinook have been destroyed.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
Further time is required to ascertain whether the Ministry of Defence holds information in scope of this question. I will write to the hon. Member and place a copy of the letter in the Library of the House.