Written questions by McMurdock.

Whether her Department plans to increase the proportion of containers inspected.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

What assessment she has made of the effectiveness of risk-based targeting in identifying non-compliant or high-risk shipments.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

What the most common categories of non-compliance identified during container inspections are.

Border Force operates a risk‑based approach to container security, focusing resources on identifying and intervening against higher‑risk movements of goods rather than physically inspecting all shipping containers entering the UK.The Home Office does not hold centrally aggregated or routinely collated data on:the number or proportion of shipping containers physically inspected;the duration of container examinations or their impact on port processing times; orBorder Force staffing levels specifically dedicated to container examinations.It is therefore not possible to provide figures for the last three years on inspections, inspection times, staffing, or breach rates.Border Force uses a range of risk‑based targeting systems to identify containers for intervention. The primary system for risking shipping containers is the Advanced Freight Targeting Capability – Shipping Containers (AFTC‑SC) platform. This capability is supported by intelligence and information from across government, including law‑enforcement partners, international partners, and other relevant government and commercial sources.Container screening is supported by non‑intrusive inspection technology, including high‑energy X‑ray imaging. Where containers are selected for further examination, Border Force officers may also deploy specialist capabilities, including detector dogs and technical detection equipment.Border Force works closely with port operators and partner agencies to ensure that security interventions are delivered effectively while minimising disruption to legitimate trade. The Department keeps its approach under regular review to ensure that it remains proportionate and effective. The effectiveness of this intelligence‑led approach is reflected in publicly reported Border Force enforcement outcomes.

What information her Department holds on the average length of time taken to complete security and background checks on border force applicants.

BPSS (Baseline Personnel Security Standard) checks are required for Home Office roles. Checks for external applicants include the following:Civil Service eligibility;right to work / ID / address checks;employment history verification;health checks (where required); and,checks relating to security and integrity, including some role-specific checks for Border Force Officers.Due to the highly contextual, case-by-case nature of recruitment, it would be neither feasible nor instructive to provide an average timespan.

What discussions she has had with road haulage providers on the potential impact of fuel duty on their sector.

The Government is taking action to ensure that fuel at the pump remains affordable. At Budget 2025, the Government extended the 5p-per-litre cut for a further five months, until the end of August this year. The Government has also cancelled the increase in line with inflation for 2026/27; instead, rates will only gradually return to early 2022 levels by March 2027. The Government's action on fuel duty will save an average heavy goods vehicle more than £800 in 2026/27 compared to previous plans, and follows an extended period where freezes to fuel duty have resulted in substantial savings for the haulage industry. The Government regularly engages with industry representatives, and as with all taxes, keeps fuel duty under review.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the feed-in-tariff export payments in the context of the contribution of small-scale renewable generators to demand on the national grid.

The Feed-in Tariffs (FIT) scheme closed to new applicants in 2019, with existing tariffs maintained and only adjusted for inflation annually. The Smart Export Guarantee (SEG), introduced in January 2020, replaced the FIT export payment with a market-led mechanism requiring suppliers to offer tariffs for exported electricity. It supports the transition to smart and flexible energy systems and is designed to enable deployment without subsidies. The average bundled SEG tariff is 15.49p/kWh and with around 50 tariffs available on the market, the SEG provides consumer choice in a competitive market.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to Essex council leaders on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, how many consultation responses he reviewed from members of the public before deciding on the local government model for Essex.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to Essex council leaders on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, what discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the local government model for Essex.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to Essex council leaders on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, on what date the decision outlined in his letter was formally taken.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to Essex council leaders on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, if he will publish representations received from local authorities in Essex on the final decision on local government in Essex.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to council leaders in Essex on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, what plans he has to publish any representations from council leaders in Essex further to that decision letter.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to council leaders in Essex on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, whether he discussed the proposed models of local government reorganisation with the leaders of (a) Thurrock Council, (b) Basildon Council and (c) Essex County Council before making his final decision.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

Media and Sport, pursuant to the Answer of 31 March 2026 to Question 123457, on Local Government and Voluntary Organisations: Social Impact Bonds, whether local authorities which are not currently covered by Mayoral Strategic Authorities will be invited to bid for Better Futures Fund funding.

DCMS remains in the design stages of the Better Futures Fund (BFF), therefore, the amount of funding allocated to different delivery partners across England remains subject to development. However, the BFF will be place-based and the Government is committed to ensuring the Fund provides adequate coverage across England. This should include providing appropriate opportunities for local authorities not currently covered by a Mayoral Strategic Authority to apply for BFF funding.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, what the projected savings to the public purse are as a result of reduced consultations.

Policy analysis is currently ongoing to develop recommendations to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy. We have already identified initial targeted first steps, but this is a significant piece of work requiring ministerial decisions across a range of policy areas. We are developing our plan of work and raising our ambition. Once this has been agreed, we will be in a position to develop quantifiable metrics in terms of resource savings to the public purse.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, how many statutory consultation requirements Ministers expect to remove or amend as a result of the reforms.

The government is committed to identifying existing disproportionate reporting and consultation duties that are slowing down delivery. This process is still ongoing.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, what systems of artificial intelligence will be used to identify disproportionate consultation and reporting requirements.

We are using state-of-the-art large language models to identify all duties to consult within the statute book, as well as contextual information such as responsible department and the circumstances under which consultation is required.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, what criteria will be used by AI systems to determine whether consultation requirements should be removed.

AI tools are being used to identify statutory requirements to consult. Decisions remain the purview of Ministers.

Media and Sport, pursuant to the Answer of 31 March 2026 to Question 123457 on Local Government and Voluntary Organisations: Social Impact Bonds, whether her Department has any plans to consult areas due to become Mayoral Strategic Authorities in 2028 upon their creation for participating in the delivery of Better Futures Fund-based projects.

DCMS remains in the design stages of the Better Futures Fund (BFF). We are aware of the need to consider the views of areas that will become Mayoral Strategic Authorities over the lifetime of the Fund, and will determine how best to do this in due course.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, whether any primary legislation will be required to implement the changes announced on 26 March 2026.

The government is committed to identifying existing disproportionate reporting and consultation duties that are slowing down delivery. The policy analysis is in the early stages and all options are being considered.

What estimate she has made of the number of students likely to withdraw from their courses as a result of losing access to maintenance support.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.