Written questions by McMurdock.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, if he will publish a list of the regularly identified excessive processes and checks which are clogging up the system referenced in his press release.

There are currently no plans to publish a list of excessive processes and checks that are clogging up the system. However, we continue to develop policy options for the sludgebusting agenda, and all options are currently open for how we communicate any changes to the public.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Ministers rip up consultation culture, published on 26 March 2026, what the higher bar will be for reporting and consultation requirements in legislation.

Consultation should only be used when it is the most effective tool for good policymaking and not used for other reasons. Reporting requirements should not disproportionately slow down delivery.

What steps her Department is taking to help ensure that students are not disadvantaged by errors made in the initial approval of student finance.

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

How many students are currently affected by the withdrawal of student finance linked to weekend or flexible learning courses.

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

With reference to her Department’s press release entitled Interest rate cap introduced to protect Plan 2 borrowers, published on 7 April 2026, what assessment she has made of the impact of the cap on incentives for graduates to pursue higher education.

The government has taken decisive action to cap the maximum interest rates on Plan 2 and Plan 3 (postgraduate) student loans at 6%, instead of the Retail Prices Index (RPI) plus 3%, for the 2026/27 academic year. This short term protective measure removes the risk of a temporary increase in inflation causing loan balances to compound at an unsustainable rate.The interest rate cap follows changes we have already made to the student finance system to improve it and make it fairer for students, graduates and taxpayers. This includes increasing the repayment threshold for Plan 2 loans to £28,470 in April 2025, its first increase since 2021, and increasing it again on 6 April this year, to £29,385. The department is also reintroducing targeted, means-tested maintenance grants from the 2028/29 academic year, providing students from low income households with up to £1,000 extra support that will not need to be repaid.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what estimate she has made of the cost to the public purse of implementing more flexible repayment arrangements.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, which types of overseas companies will be eligible to relocate to the UK under the proposed regime.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.Are solvent.Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, whether companies from all jurisdictions will be eligible to re-domicile to the UK under the proposed reforms.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciliation to the UK will be available to bodies corporate located in a jurisdiction that permits outward re-domiciliation to the UK and which fulfil the following requirements:Meet the definition for a ‘body corporate’ as defined in section 1173(1) of the Companies Act 2006.Intend to carry on business following its re-domiciliation.Are solvent.Not subject to (and its proposed directors, persons with significant control or members are not subject to) asset freezes or director disqualifications sanctions.Provide all the information required to apply to re-domicile to the UK. This includes all the information that someone forming a company in the UK would provide as well as additional information. This includes confirmation that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, what timetable he has set for introducing legislation to implement the re-domiciliation regime.

A corporate re-domiciliation regime will require primary legislation to implement the required changes to company, insolvency and tax legislation. The Government is committed to introducing legislation when parliamentary time allows.

What steps her Department is taking to reduce the time taken to inspect shipping containers at ports while maintaining accuracy.

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 impact of container inspections on port congestion and processing times.

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.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what measures will be used to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what metrics will be used to assess whether repayment plans are genuinely affordable for individuals.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Pursuant to his Department’s press release entitled Reforms to make it easier for overseas companies to move to the UK, published on 25 March 2026, how the proposed re-domiciliation regime will interact with recent reforms to Companies House, including identity verification requirements.

Under current proposals set out for public consultation, re-domiciled companies will retain all criminal and civil liabilities, and all contracts, debts and other obligations, to which the re-domiciling body corporate was subject immediately before re-domiciliation.To successfully re-domicile, companies will need to provide proof of de-registration in the departing jurisdiction within 60 days of registration in the UK. It is expected that the departing jurisdiction will satisfy itself that the body corporate has met any existing jurisdiction-specific liabilities that need to be met prior to approving its exit and de-registration.Companies must also confirm in their application that any authorisation or other action required by the departing jurisdiction has been given or will have been given on re-domiciliation and that the body corporate is not prevented from making the application because it is subject to a restriction on applying with an offence for making a false or misleading statement in the application.Once a body corporate has re-domiciled to the UK, it will be treated in the same way as a company originally incorporated in the UK . This includes relevant new requirements introduced by the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023, such as confirming that future activities will be lawful and for the proposed directors and persons of significant control to have their identities verified.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what assessment she has made of variations in repayment practices between departments prior to the introduction of the new strategy.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Communities and Local Government, with reference to his decision letter to council leaders in Essex on local government reorganisation, dated 25 March 2026, when he plans to bring forward legislation to implement his decision on local government reorganisation in Essex.

Subject to Parliamentary approval, new unitary councils are expected to take on full council functions from 1 April 2028, with elections to new shadow councils in May 2027. The scheme of elections for the new councils will be set out in the Structural Changes Order, with all‑out elections expected, in line with previous reorganisations. Under the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, only certain types of councils may resolve to move from whole‑council elections to elections by thirds, and these provisions do not apply to newly established councils. As set out in the Secretary of State’s letter of 26 March 2026, it is anticipated that the Structural Changes Order will be brought forward in the Autumn. No decisions have yet been taken on the warding arrangements, including how many wards there will be and how many councillors will serve each ward. As set out in the Department’s letter of 26 March, councils in Essex have been asked to submit their suggested interim warding arrangements, based on existing wards, divisions and parish boundaries, by 29 May for inclusion in the Structural Changes Order.

What technologies are currently used to support container inspections, including non-intrusive scanning and risk-based targeting systems.

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.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, which types of debt owed to government will be included within the scope of the new affordability measures.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what estimate she has made of the proportion of people in government debt repayment plans who are currently making payments deemed unaffordable.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.

Pursuant to her Department’s press release entitled Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments, published on 20 March 2026, what reduction in default rates she expects as a result of introducing more tailored and affordable repayment plans.

The press release entitled ‘Government to Improve Support for Affordable Debt Repayments’, published on 20 March 2026, publicised the Government Debt Management Strategy 2026–2030. The strategy sets out the Government Debt Management Function’s (GDMF) vision and principles for good debt management across central government. It does not introduce a single new, cross-government “affordable repayment plan” policy with uniform terms; repayment arrangements continue to be set by individual departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) in line with their specific legislation, policies and the circumstances of the individual. This includes consideration of interest rates, repayment incentives / disincentives, repayment period length, specific performance metrics and associated costs. Affordability is assessed with an income and expenditure statement, discussion and regular reviews. All repayment plans should be affordable, so requested data on the proportion of repayment plans that are affordable, as well as metrics to assess this in the future, does not exist. The ability for an individual to challenge or seek a review of an affordability assessment depends on the type of debt, the individual’s circumstances and the department or ALB to which the debt is owed. Individuals can contact the relevant organisation to discuss their circumstances and any review or appeal routes available for that debt type. Information about the government’s plan to identify individuals at risk of falling into debt at an earlier stage and how the government has taken consideration of differences in repayment practices is available at Prevent Resolve Improve 26-30 Government Debt Management Strategy - GOV.UK.