Written questions by Dewhirst.

Food and Rural Affairs, what representations he has received from (a) the NFU, (b) the CLA , (c) Historic Houses and (d) other rural stakeholders on the economic challenges posed by the proposed inheritance tax reforms.

Ministers from multiple Government departments have had several meetings with agricultural organisations on this matter since the Autumn Budget last year. In February, the Exchequer Secretary and Minister for Food Security and Rural Affairs both met the National Farmers Union, the Tenant Farmers Association, the Country Land and Business Association, the Central Association of Agricultural Valuers, the Ulster Farmers Union, NFU Cymru, NFU Scotland and the Farmers Union of Wales. Ministers have participated in several debates in Parliament to listen to views. After listening, the Government is confident that the approach set out is an appropriate one.

Food and Rural Affairs, whether he has made an assessment of trends in the level of investment in fish processing infrastructure.

The Government works closely with the processing sector across the UK and recognises that it is integral to the success of the wider UK seafood supply chain. The Government has supported the processing sector through a variety of initiatives, including investments in infrastructure through funding schemes such as the UK Seafood Fund. These efforts aim to ensure the long-term resilience and competitiveness of the UK seafood supply chain. The Government monitors levels of investment through mechanisms such as Seafish’s annual surveys. We recognise that levels of private investment in the seafood processing sector can vary over time for a range of reasons.

Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the implications for his Department’s policies of the report by Family Business UK entitled Taxing Futures: The economic and fiscal implications of changes to BPR & APR for UK family businesses and farms, published in June 2025.

The Government is confident that its reforms to agricultural property relief and business property relief from 6 April 2026 get the balance right between supporting farms and businesses and fixing the public finances in a fair way. The reforms reduce the inheritance tax advantages available to owners of agricultural and business assets but still mean those assets will be taxed at a much lower effective rate than most other assets. Despite a tough fiscal context, the Government will maintain very significant levels of relief from inheritance tax beyond what is available to others and compared to the position before 1992.

Food and Rural Affairs, what plans his Department has to support the development of fish processing facilities in coastal communities.

This Government supports the fishing industry and recognises their key role in food supply. As part of this support, Defra has reopened the Fisheries and Seafood Scheme on 9 June 2025, allocating around £6 million to create a sustainable and resilient seafood sector. In addition to this, the £360 million Fisheries and Coastal Growth Fund will support the next generation of fishermen and breathe new life into our coastal communities.

Food and Rural Affairs, if he list the (a) tax reliefs and (b) grant schemes to support fishing vessel upgrades to adapt to changing (i) economic and (ii) environmental conditions.

Alongside existing tax reliefs, we are committed to supporting fishers through targeted financial schemes that enable vessel modernisation and adaptation. Available reliefs include Annual Investment Allowance (AIA), Enhanced Capital Allowances (ECA), Fuel Duty Relief, and Capital Allowances on plant and machinery. To further support the industry, Defra reopened the Fisheries and Seafood Scheme on 9 June 2025, allocating around £6 million to create a sustainable and resilient seafood sector. Additionally, the £360 million Fisheries and Coastal Growth Fund will secure our fishing industry for decades to come and support our coastal communities and make it fit for the 21st century.

Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of proposed reforms to (a) Agricultural Property Relief and (b) Business Property Relief on the rural economy.

The decision to reform agricultural property relief and business property relief was a difficult but necessary decision in order to restore economic stability, fix the public finances, and support public services, including in rural communities. The Government is confident that its reforms to agricultural property relief and business property relief from 6 April 2026 get the balance right between supporting farms and businesses and fixing the public finances in a fair way.

Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of introducing compensation schemes for fishers affected by environmental designations.

In a written statement released in January 2025 by Minister Hardy, it was recognised that the accelerating development of marine activities, including environmental protection and restoration measures such as the designation of new Marine Protected Areas, is increasing marine spatial tensions. The Government will ensure that the fishing industry is supported to adapt to increased pressure on space, and we will work with the industry to maintain its viability into the future. We are looking at how to best support fishers and will work closely with them as part of this work.

Whether his Department has made an assessment of the potential impact of proposed changes to NHS staffing levels on the economy of local communities.

NHS England has asked integrated care boards (ICBs) to act primarily as strategic commissioners of health and care services and reduce duplication of responsibilities within the health and care structure. To deliver on this commitment, ICBs have drafted and shared their delivery and resource plan including staffing management in accordance with the guidance set out in Sir Jim Mackey's letter of 1 April 2025 and the Model ICB framework. NHS England is working with ICBs to review and implement these plans.NHS England is also working closely with ICBs to ensure these changes do not compromise quality of care or the statutory responsibilities of ICBs. We expect ICBs to consider how these changes impact on staff and take the necessary steps to protect frontline staff. No specific assessment has been made in regard to the impact on the economy of the local communities.

Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions he has had with the Chancellor of the Exchequer on the potential merits of a clawback mechanism as an alternative to the proposed changes to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief.

This is a decision for His Majesty’s Treasury.

Food and Rural Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 11 March 2025 to Question 35636 on Agriculture and Business: Inheritance Tax, whether his Department has requested sight of the Treasury’s modelling that concludes a clawback mechanism would raise significantly less revenue than the proposed reforms to Agricultural Property Relief and Business Property Relief.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer provided on 4 March 2025 to PQ 32918.

What estimate he has made of the projected total cost of redundancy packages arising from the proposed changes to NHS England and DHSC; and what estimate he has made of the net financial benefit after these costs are accounted for.

The future Department will be smaller, more agile, and more efficient, delivering value for money for the public and empowering our health system to improve health and care for patients. We recognise that to achieve this, there will be some short-term upfront costs as we undertake the integration of NHS England and the Department, but these costs and more will be recouped in future years because of a smaller and leaner centre. By the end of the process, we estimate that these changes will save hundreds of millions of pounds a year, which will be reinvested in frontline services. At this stage it is too early to say what the upfront costs of integration are, including any redundancy, while transition planning is ongoing.

What assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of proposed NHS workforce reductions on (a) East Yorkshire and (b) other (i) rural and (ii) coastal communities.

NHS England has asked integrated care boards (ICBs) to act primarily as strategic commissioners of health and care services and reduce duplication of responsibilities within the health and care structure. All ICBs, including Humber and North Yorkshire ICB and other ICBs covering rural and coastal areas, have drafted and shared their delivery and resource plan in accordance with the guidance set out in Sir Jim Mackey's letter of 1 April 2025 and the Model ICB framework. NHS England is working with ICBs to review and implement these plans.NHS England is working closely with ICBs to ensure these changes do not compromise quality of care or the statutory responsibilities of ICBs. We expect ICBs to consider how these changes impact on staff and take the necessary steps to protect frontline staff. No specific assessment of impact has been made for rural and coastal communities.

What (a) analysis and (b) modelling he used for the target of 50% reduction in staff across (i) NHS England and (ii) his Department; and whether that target was based on (A) internal performance reviews, (B) external advice and (C) financial modelling.

The future Department will be smaller, more agile, and more efficient, delivering value for money for the public and empowering our health system to improve health and care for patients. To realise this vision, the new Department will be stripped of duplication and bureaucracy. It will also need to operate very differently from the current arrangement, making important decisions about what it does and does not do and transforming ways of working.As part of these changes, we are intending to reduce the headcount across the Department and NHS England which will deliver hundreds of millions of pounds of savings each year which can be recycled into front line service delivery. Work is progressing to now take forward the detailed design and operating model for the new integrated organisation, and plan for the smooth transfer of people, functions and responsibilities. The precise reduction agreed will be done through careful design, deliberation and consultation in the spirit of making sure that the set-up is right for the longer term.

What assessment his Department has made of the capacity of Integrated Care Boards to deliver services effectively (a) during and (b) after proposed structural reforms.

NHS England has asked integrated care boards (ICBs) to act primarily as strategic commissioners of health and care services and reduce duplication of responsibilities within the health and care structure. To deliver on this commitment, ICBs have drafted and shared their delivery and resource plan including staffing management in accordance with the guidance set out in Sir Jim Mackey's letter of 1 April 2025 and the Model ICB framework. NHS England is working with ICBs to review and implement these plans.NHS England is working closely with ICBs to ensure these changes do not compromise quality of care or the statutory responsibilities of ICBs.

Whether her Department has made an assessment of the potential (a) mental health and (b) financial impact of losing entitlement to Personal Independence Payment due to the 20-metre walking rule on claimants; and if she will review this criterion in light of concern from disabled groups.

For those with physical restrictions, the enhanced rate of the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) mobility component is for those "unable" or "virtually unable" to walk. The 20 metre distance distinguishes between those whose mobility is significantly more limited than others and who face the greater barriers on a day-to-day basis, (those who have the highest need). Distance is not the only factor considered when applying a descriptor for the ‘moving around’ activity, and the ‘reliability’ criteria also apply. This means individuals who can walk more than 20 metres can still receive the enhanced rate of the mobility component if they cannot do so safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly or in a reasonable time. Whilst claimants can only reach an enhanced mobility award in activity 12 if they cannot reliably walk more than 20 metres, they may still qualify for a standard award should they satisfy another descriptor scoring a minimum of 8 points. Claimants can also reach a standard or enhanced mobility award by scoring 8, or 12 points respectively across activities 11 and 12 combined. No assessment has been made of the potential mental health impact of losing entitlement to PIP due to the 20 metre distance in the criteria. It would be extremely difficult to objectively separate the specific impact of this on mental health from other contributory factors. I have launched a review of the PIP assessment, including the descriptors, which I am leading. The first phase of this work has now begun, which includes speaking to stakeholders to gather views on how best to approach the review, and the terms of reference will be published in due course.

Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of (a) Marine Protected Areas and (b) offshore wind development on (i) fishing grounds and (ii) fishermen.

Defra established the cross-Government Marine Spatial Prioritisation programme to build our understanding of how we can best manage the demands on the English marine environment. Through our work on co-location we are also looking at ways for different industries such as offshore wind and fishing to co-exist and benefit from our marine space. When designating Marine Protected Areas, fisheries regulators make detailed assessments of the impact of all fishing activities on the protected species and habitats in our MPAs and develop byelaws to restrict fishing when it has been assessed as damaging. Any proposed byelaws are consulted on, including with the fishing industry. These site-by-site assessments help to ensure fishing is not unduly restricted.

What safeguards are in place to prevent misuse of the Child Maintenance Service by resident parents making unfounded or exaggerated claims in order to maximise payments from the non-resident parent.

Child Maintenance Service (CMS) decisions are made by caseworkers who consider all the evidence and apply the law, including any relevant case law, to the facts of each case.Where the legislation specifies or implies that a caseworker make a discretionary decision, the judgement must be reasonable and unbiased, taking in all relevant matters and discarding irrelevant matters.There may be occasions where a caseworker must make a decision based on incomplete or contradictory information. If this is the case and the caseworker is unable to corroborate the information, they will have to exercise their judgement, considering all the available evidence, and make a decision based on the balance of probabilities the information or allegation provided is true or not.If a parent feels that a decision taken by the Child Maintenance Service is incorrect, they can ask it to look at the decision again. This is known as a mandatory reconsideration. If a parent still feels that the decision taken is incorrect after they receive a mandatory reconsideration notice, they will be able to appeal to an independent tribunal.

Food and Rural Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to (a) ensure that fishing corridors are maintained and (b) minimise the potential impact of offshore wind developments on fishing grounds.

Defra established the cross-Government Marine Spatial Prioritisation programme to build our understanding of how we can best manage the demands on the English marine environment, including fisheries. Through our work on co-location we are also looking at ways for different industries such as offshore wind and fishing to co-exist and benefit from our marine space.

If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of Child Maintenance Service enforcement procedures on (a) the mental health of and (b) suicide rates for non-resident (i) parents and (ii) parents who are men.

The Child Maintenance Service (CMS) is committed to ensuring that it delivers a safe service that is sensitive to the needs of all the parents that use it. We recognise that some parents may face difficult circumstances, particularly at a time of separation.The CMS is well prepared to respond quickly and effectively if it becomes aware that the safety of any of its customers are at risk, and caseworkers receive extensive training and follow a well-managed process with clear steps to support vulnerable clients.Caseworkers have access to several tools and procedures to help support customers when they advise they cannot afford to pay child maintenance or are struggling with the cost of living in general and are in financial or emotional crisis.This includes the National District Provision Toolkit and Affordability Hub which provides invaluable information to allow caseworkers to signpost to national and local support organisations for debt help and mental health assistance across the UK.The CMS do not recognise any data or evidence that indicates a causal link between the Child Maintenance Service and suicides amongst paying parents. However, we do recognise that many paying parents face difficult circumstances and may be in emotional crisis.

What data the Government holds on gender disparities in Child Maintenance Service cases; and what steps she is taking to ensure that the system treats both mothers and fathers equally and without bias.

In the quarter ending December 2024, of the 680,000 Paying Parents 93% were male.The Child Maintenance Service aims to provide a high-quality service to all of its parents. The CMS treats parents equally as individuals based on their roles within the scheme and makes no reference to gender. The Department has a specific duty to assess the impact of proposed policies and services and any changes to them on equality. This ensures the Department meets the Public Sector Equality Duty.