Written questions by Hollinrake.

Pursuant to the answer to question 102805 on Solar Power: Land Use, what evidence underpins the decision to make Soil Resources and Management Plans advisory rather than mandatory.

The policy on encouraging rather than mandating developers to implement Soil Resources and Management Plans is set out in National Policy Statement EN-3 which was updated in 2026 and has been subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny. The National Policy Statements set clear requirements that the mitigation hierarchy must be applied to environmental impacts. The requirement to produce a Soil Resources and Management Plan is frequently included in individual planning conditions enforced by local authorities. The effectiveness of planning policies and guidance are monitored to ensure mitigation and reporting requirements are still appropriate.

Pursuant to the answer to question 102809 on Solar Power: Decommissioning, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of mandating the return to previous use of sites previously used for solar.

The National Policy Statements require applicants to assess and mitigate for environmental impacts of their proposals across the lifecycle of the proposed development, including decommissioning. No specific assessment has been made on mandating the return of sites to their previous use. This requirement is usually included in a planning condition enforced by local authorities.

When he intends to publish an answer to Question 112198, tabled on 10 February 2026, on Lord Mandelson.

A response has been issued here.

Pursuant to the answer to question 102809 on Solar Power: Decommissioning, if he will make it his policy to issue such guidance.

Developers are required to set out arrangements for decommissioning in their planning applications, as set out in National Policy Statement EN-3. The Department has no current plans to publish separate guidance.

When she intends to publish an answer to Question 113817, tabled on 20 February 2026, on Public Houses: Business Rates.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer given to Question UIN113817 on 1 April 2026.

When he intends to publish an answer to Question 113780, tabled on 20 February 2026, on Labour Together.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer given to PQ 113780 on 24 March 2026.

Food and Rural Affairs, when she intends to publish an answer to Question 118227, tabled on 5 March 2026, on Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Secondment.

An answer to Question 118227 was published on 16 April 2026.

Food and Rural Affairs, what methodology the Animal and Plant Health Agency uses to determine the compensation value of poultry culled during avian influenza outbreaks; and whether this valuation is benchmarked against prevailing commercial market prices for equivalent birds.

Compensation is paid by Defra for animals culled by the Government for disease control purposes in England, as set out in the Animal Health Act 1981. The Animal and Plant Health Agency (APHA) makes its assessment of the disease status of the birds based on clinical inspection and veterinary judgment. There is no compensation available for sick birds or birds that have died. Compensation is not paid for consequential losses, including business interruption caused by control measures, nor for eggs or poultry meat. The amount of compensation is established by APHA using the relevant valuation rate card (or for birds or husbandry systems not covered by the rate cards, by a specialist valuer). The valuation rate cards are updated by independent consultants five times per year (in January, March, June, September and November) to ensure rates are in line with average market values for the types of birds.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, with reference to the Electoral Commission, Annual Report and Accounts 2024-25, HC 1086, page 107, why the Electoral Commission has an independent adviser for equality, diversity and inclusion.

The Electoral Commission does not currently have an independent Equality, Diversity and Inclusion adviser. The Commission appointed an independent adviser on EDI between September 2022 - September 2023.The Commission's EDI Strategy is on the Commission's website. It outlines the equalities legislation that applies to the Commission, how it meets its duties, and how it strives to ensure electoral processes are open and accessible to all voters and campaigners.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, pursuant to the answer of 4 March 2026, to Question 116489, on By-elections: Gorton and Denton, if the Electoral Commission will make it their policy to issue a press release on the conclusion of any assessment it has made in relation to this by-election.

Greater Manchester Police are currently reviewing allegations of electoral fraud at the Gorton and Denton by-election. The Commission is in close contact with the police and with the Returning Officer.Once the review is concluded, the Commission will consider the outcome and any additional action needed.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, whether the Parliamentary Parties Panel was consulted by the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government prior to the publication of its policy paper entitled Restoring trust in our democracy: Our strategy for modern and secure elections, published on 17 July 2025.

Questions about consultation on a UK Government document, as in this case, are a matter for the relevant Department.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, whether the Electoral Commission has produced guidance on how donations made in foreign currencies should be treated for the purposes of donation reporting rules.

The Electoral Commission hasn't produced specific guidance on donations that are in foreign currencies.Political parties must report the value of the donations in Pounds Sterling at the time of receipt if they are above the reporting threshold and check it for permissibility if it is above £500.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, if it will itemise each individual breach relating to the Labour Together fine from September 2021.

Labour Together failed to deliver 27 donation reports within 30 days of accepting the donations. The donations amounted to £739,492. Labour Together was late in reporting all of these donations, ranging from 39 days late to 1,292 days late.The organisation also inaccurately reported the value of a cash donation from an individual donor. The donation was initially reported as being £18,000 when it should have been reported as £20,000, so it was under-reported by £2,000. The non-compliance existed for three years and three months.Labour Together also failed to appoint a responsible person within 30 days of each donation being accepted. No sanction was imposed for these offences due to mitigating factors.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, with reference to the urgent question of 23 February 2026, on Labour Together and APCO Worldwide: Cabinet Office Review, if the Electoral Commission will publish their internal report on Labour Together.

The Commission does not publish internal documents relating to its regulatory work. It publishes information about recently closed investigations every month, including the possible offences it investigated, the outcome and any further action. An overview of the Commission’s investigation into Labour Together is listed under April 2021 – March 2022.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, pursuant to the Answer of 13 November 2025 to Question 89567, on Political Parties: Finance, what (a) advice and (b) guidance the Electoral Commission has issued on donations received through a personal services company.

Donations received through personal services companies owned by a regulated donee are likely to be considered as being made to the regulated donee on behalf of the original donor. This is because donations to regulated donees includes anything given directly or indirectly to them through a third person under electoral law.In these instances, the personal services company would be acting as an agent for the donation.

Representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission, pursuant to the answer of 11 December 2025, to Question 97793, on Reform UK: Cryptocurrencies, from what date have political parties been required to declare to the Electoral Commission donations that have been made via a crypto-currency or as a crypto-asset.

The Commission has published guidance for political parties that are considering accepting cryptocurrency assets. It sets out that cryptoassets are considered property, which is in line with HMRC and Financial Conduct Authority guidance, and should be treated as a non-monetary donation.It has always been a requirement for political parties to report the nature and value of non-monetary donations if they are greater than the reporting threshold (£11,800). The Commission’s updated guidance clarified that this applies to cryptoasset donations.

With reference to the then Deputy Prime Minister's Oral Statement of 25 March 2024 on Cyber-security and UK Democracy, Official Report, columns 1261 to 1264, what was the name of the Chinese state-sponsored group which undertook the cyber-attack.

The then Deputy Prime Minister’s Oral Statement of 25 March 2024 on Cyber-security and UK Democracy refers to two malicious cyber campaigns by Chinese state-affiliated actors: “first, compromising the United Kingdom’s Electoral Commission between 2021 and 2022, as was announced last summer, and secondly, by attempting reconnaissance activity against UK parliamentary accounts in a separate campaign in 2021”. Attribution for cyber-attacks is a formal process. The Government will only attribute a cyber-attack to a specific actor when we are confident that we have the evidence to do so, and when it is in the UK’s national interest. In the oral statement dated 25 March 2024, the National Cyber Security Centre attributed the second campaign to the Chinese state-affiliated cyber actor known as APT31.

Representing the House of Commons Commission, pursuant to the answer of 17 July 2025 to Question 66189 on Written Questions, whether the House of Commons Table Office has an internal guidance document on the carding of written parliamentary questions.

The Table Office cards questions which do not comply with the House’s rules of order. ‘Carding’ is essentially an invitation for the Member, or staff acting on their behalf, to call the Table Office to discuss and resolve the issue so the question can be swiftly tabled or, if necessary, withdrawn. The rules of order relating to questions are summarised in Chapter 22 of Erskine May which provides the basis on which questions are carded. The Office has various internal working documents and training materials providing guidance on operational matters including on questions, motions and the order paper.

What is the make and model of the safe used by the Cabinet Office Propriety and Ethics Team in 70 Whitehall.

We do not comment on security matters.

Media and Sport, whether she has had discussions with the Charity Commission on it making an assessment of whether IM01 LIMITED trading as Inter-Mediate, Charity number: 1143848, is undertaking (a) charitable activities and (b) commercial activities.

DCMS has not had discussions with the Charity Commission for England and Wales regarding the activities of IM01 Limited.