Rosie Duffield

The Office for Equality and Opportunity (OEO) meets with a broad range of external stakeholders to test and develop its public-facing policies and initiatives, but does not meet with internal staff networks. Matters relating to internal Civil Service policies can be discussed with the Government People Group or individual departmental HR teams as necessary.

The Government has consulted on the implementation of its commitment to not issue new oil and gas licences to explore new fields and will respond in due course. It does not intend to revoke existing licences.

The Government has announced it will introduce new legislation to restrict the future licensing of new coal mines in Great Britain. The last coal fired power station closed in October 2024.

The Government’s Clean Power 2030 Action Plan paves the way to decarbonising the wider economy by 2050 as it pursues the electrification of heat in buildings, transport, and industry.

Compliance with biomass sustainability criteria is a priority and Ofgem as the independent regulator is responsible for ensuring generators’ compliance. Ofgem’s recent investigation found that whilst Drax complied with sustainability standards, it had failed to report data accurately. This is a serious matter and Government expects full compliance with all regulatory obligations. Ofgem did not find any evidence to suggest that Drax had been issued with subsidies incorrectly. Drax’s subsequent £25 million redress payment underscores the robustness of the regulatory system.

Ofgem as the independent energy regulator is responsible for assuring the Government that large scale biomass generators, such as Drax, are in full compliance with sustainability requirements. Ofgem recently undertook a full investigation into Drax’s compliance and found that whilst Drax complied with the standards, it failed to report data accurately. The size of Drax’s redress payment in light of this, £25m, and the steps they’ve agreed to take to improve data accuracy, underscores the robustness of the regulatory system.

In line with the Gambling Act 2005, the levy will be collected and administered by the Gambling Commission under the strategic direction of the government. As set out in the government’s response to the statutory levy consultation, we have appointed UK Research and Innovation and NHS England as the research and treatment commissioners respectively. This approach will leverage world-leading expertise among existing public bodies, maximise efficiency and see levy funding directed where it is needed most. Further consideration of the evidence is needed in order to appoint an appropriate body to lead the prevention strand of the levy system. We will confirm our decisions in due course.

Access to healthcare services is based on the clinical needs of the individual. The type of school a child attends does not affect their eligibility for access to NHS healthcare services. Parents or carers with concerns about their child’s health can speak to their GP who can make a referral to the relevant healthcare services. The NHS will consider referrals based on clinical need.

It remains the case that the NHS is free at the point of use and provides care to anyone who needs it.

The government has devolved and delegated approximately 60% of the adult skills fund (ASF) to the 9 Mayoral Combined Authorities of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, North East, South Yorkshire, Tees Valley, West Midlands, West of England, West Yorkshire and the Greater London Authority. The authorities are now responsible for the provision of adult education and allocation of the ASF in their local areas and it is for them to decide how they wish to prioritise funding.

In the remainder of England, the department continues to be responsible for adult skills funding. Within the ASF, the department will not fund provision where the primary or sole intent of the learning is for leisure.

The government has to take difficult decisions on where to prioritise funding. Given the economic and social challenges in the country, it is right that the primary purpose of the ASF is to support learners into employment and to progress to further learning. The ASF also supports wider outcomes including improving health and wellbeing, equipping parents and carers to support their child’s learning and developing stronger and more integrated communities.

This Government is putting customers at the heart of the water system. While stakeholder engagement is a matter for individual water companies, customers will be able to hold water company bosses to account through powerful new customer panels that are being developed. Ministers have met with all company boards to ensure they understand the Government’s drive to transform the water sector and to hear how they plan to meet their obligations to customers and the environment.

To deliver our 30by30 commitments Defra works closely with arms-length bodies and other departments, including the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

This includes through the National Estate for Nature Group, of which the MoD, which manages extensive estates, is a member.

Natural England and other Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies (SNCBs) also support the MoD in managing land to enhance biodiversity, and in minimising the impacts of their operations on Marine Protected Areas. We are working across Government, including with the MoD, to publish our delivery strategy for 30by30 on land in England.

Regarding adequate support

Introduction of the I-VMS licence condition was communicated to industry in March 2025 before coming into force on 12 May 2025 for English licensed vessels. It is an interim measure to support English vessel owners be as prepared as possible for when the legislation comes into force, by ensuring vessels have a type-approved device installed and also so we can work with owners and suppliers to address any technical or logistical issues.

MMO continues to work with I-VMS device suppliers to assist industry with any issues with I-VMS devices to try and resolve them. We are aware both suppliers are currently experiencing a high volume of enquiries. Fishers are able to contact a dedicated MMO I-VMS helpline which is open Monday to Friday, 9am to 5pm, by calling 01900 508618, or email  ivms@marinemanagement.org.uk.

Regarding fair enforcement

Where MMO are informed fishers are taking steps to be compliant by arranging installation or working with suppliers to resolve issues, they will take a measured approach to any enforcement activity under the licence condition.

The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) has two roles involved in assessments of offshore developments in two parts:

1. As the competent authority under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 to approve marine licences below MHWS.

1. As a statutory consultee and interested party as part of the Planning Act 2008 for National Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs).

For marine licences we undertake consultation including a public consultation as part of the assessment process. This can involve consultation with the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) as our scientific advisors who provides comments on the impacts to fishing and fish and shellfish ecology. The public consultation period allows anyone to provide comments on the impacts of the development. Through the Regional Fisheries Groups (RFGs), marine licensing applications with potential to significantly impact fishing activities within 12 nautical miles are shared with the inshore fishing sector at consultation stage to improve visibility and ensure potential impacts are considered by the fishing industry.

The MMO also has a mapping system that highlights the fishing effort, fish ecology and other developments within the area of the proposed development and makes all decisions in line with the Marine Plan(s) for the area the development is in, and the applicant must submit a full assessment of their impact against the plan. All this information is used to make a decision on the impacts of the project on fisheries to make a positive determination on the project.

For NSIP projects the MMO reviews the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which includes Fish and Shellfish Ecology and Commercial Fisheries chapters. MMO provides comments on these and highlights the areas that are subject to spatial squeeze, areas including species or habitat type that may be impacted by developments. MMO also consults the Cefas as our scientific advisors who also provides comments on the impacts to fishing and fish and shellfish ecology. In addition, MMO asks developers to ensure updates to documents are made in relation to any fisheries comments from other interested parties. It is for the Secretary of State for each application to decide on the impacts of fishing and if the project needs any restrictions or additional information.

The MMO is taking further steps to ensure the data we have is used to provide detailed up to date knowledge of the potential cumulative impacts from offshore development. All data from offshore developments is being included on the marine data exchange, managed by The Crown Estate.

The Marine Management Organisation (MMO) is responsible for the enforcement of fisheries regulations within the English sector of UK waters. Foreign flagged fishing vessels are not permitted to fish within the 0-6nm zone and access to the 6-12nm zone is restricted to those foreign vessels which have a historic track-record of access and meet certain criteria around gear types and engine power. The MMO monitors the movements of all foreign and UK fishing vessels within English waters using Vessel Monitoring System tracking data and alarms are received when a vessel is detected travelling at fishing speeds within an area where they are not permitted to fish. All alarms are investigated and enforcement action taken according to the MMO’s compliance and enforcement strategy when non-compliance is detected.

The MMO also operate two Offshore Patrol Vessels which carry out inspections at sea of fishing vessels within English waters. Inspections are targeted according to a risk-based approach incorporating considerations including vessel size, gear type, history of compliance and received intelligence. In FY 2024/2025, 368 UK vessels and 244 non-UK vessels were inspected at sea.

I refer the Hon. Member to the answer I gave to the Hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark on 10 June 2025 to Question 53884.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the United Kingdom’s fertility sector regulator, has advised that it sets out strict requirements in its Licence Conditions and Code of Practice in relation to the recruitment of donors and the information that must be given to egg donors in advance of donating at United Kingdom licensed fertility clinics, which includes information about the potential immediate or longer-term health risks. The HFEA Code of Practice states that advertising should be designed with regard to the sensitive issues involved in recruiting donors and should follow the Advertising Standards Authority codes.

My Rt Hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care has not considered additional compulsory listing of health risks on adverts for egg donors.

Some immunosuppressive drugs are known to cause a structural or functional change in the foetus, known as teratogenic drugs, and so this is a critical area of concern in transplant medicine, and discussion with a patient’s transplant team is important to ensure the most appropriate immunosuppressive regime is provided for the best care of both parent and embryo.

NHS England Specialised Commissioning has not undertaken a specific impact assessment of taking immunosuppressant drugs during pregnancy on babies in utero, specifically in the context of transplant recipients. However, guidance is typically informed by a combination of clinical experience, research literature, and recommendations from broader medical bodies. The policies and practices in place in solid organ transplant centres are evidence based, and consider the safety and efficacy of the use of these drugs, including where National Institute for Health and Care Excellence evaluations have taken place.

NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) is responsible for organ donation across the United Kingdom.

In the UK, womb donation for transplant is not included in the standard organ donation process and is therefore not part of routine deemed consent. Donations for new types of transplants are only undertaken following a special and/or additional voluntary request to a family. It is also usually done for specific research programmes where people die in very rare circumstances and where a particular kind of donation may be possible.

The Department has worked in collaboration with National Health Service hospitals like Imperial College Healthcare Trust and Oxford University Hospitals in facilitating womb transplant research and clinical trials, however, it is not yet a standard NHS treatment and there are no current plans to include womb transplants on the organ donation register.

Since 1 April 2024 there have been no new initiations of exogenous hormones through the NHS Children and Young People's Gender Service.

The Wider Service Medal was introduced to provide medallic recognition for operational activity that delivers a significant and direct contribution to UK objectives in rigorous circumstances, but not necessarily in roles exposed to physical risk.

The date of 11 December 2018 was determined as a clearly defined point in time when Her Late Majesty The Queen approved the initial concept of the Wider Service Medal. At that time there was no intention to include any retrospection, so using December 2018 as the start date for the Medal is considered a balanced approach that recognises the original discussions and Her Late Majesty’s initial approval.

The Department has no plans to review the date of December 2018.

The Defence Infrastructure Organisation has undertaken a Baseline Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment for Old Park and Chequers Wood.

This Assessment details primary habitats and provides an ecological baseline for the site.

The site is being disposed of in accordance with the Department's standard process as mandated by His Majesty's Treasury. The site is designated in part as a Site of Special Scientific Interest and any development potential is limited. However, once sold, the future use of the site is a matter for the potential purchaser in conjunction with the local planning authority, and this is something the Ministry of Defence cannot influence.

The National Planning Policy Framework makes clear that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should apply the principle that if significant harm to biodiversity resulting from a development cannot be avoided, adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for, then planning permission should be refused.

Any mitigation or compensation would be set out in planning conditions and obligations associated with the relevant planning permission, enabling local planning authorities to monitor the development's implementation and, if necessary, take enforcement action.

More widely, the government is clear that the current approach to discharging environmental obligations is too often delaying and deterring development and placing unnecessary burdens on housebuilders and local authorities. It requires housebuilders to pay for localised and often costly mitigation measures, only to maintain the environmental status quo. By not taking a holistic view across larger geographies, mitigation measures often fail to secure the best outcomes for the environment.

The Nature Restoration Fund provided for by Part 3 of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will end this sub-optimal arrangement. By facilitating a more strategic approach to the discharge of environmental obligations, in order to address the impact of development and improve the conservation status of the relevant environmental feature, it will streamline the delivery of new homes and infrastructure and result in improved environmental outcomes being delivered more efficiently.

In establishing an alternative to the existing system, the Nature Restoration Fund intentionally provides flexibility to diverge from a restrictive application of the mitigation hierarchy. We believe this flexibility should apply where, in Natural England's expert judgement, this would be appropriate and in line with the overarching objective of delivering better outcomes for the relevant environmental feature over the course of the EDP - including conservation measures being delivered at a different site to where the development impacts are being felt.

There will be a continued role for the mitigation hierarchy in the design of Environmental Delivery Plans, ensuring that local conservation measures are preferred unless there is a clearly articulated environmental basis to look further afield.