The Government recognises that the use of AI tools and other forms of technical innovation is increasing. Where these tools are used, they can - as in the case of the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) - help increase efficiency in certain processes. Whilst the BBFC operates independently of government, including in the tools and processes it employs, the organisation provides regular updates to government on its work, including the use of AI tools.

The government expects the BBFC to keep at the heart of its work its responsibility for protecting audiences - in particular children - from viewing harmful or inappropriate content. This means ensuring that BBFC Compliance Officers continue, as now, to be fully involved in the classification process; ensuring that AI tools are used to complement rather than replace human oversight of that process; and ensuring the robustness of the safeguards in place around its AI tools, such as audits and spot checks.

There are no plans to review Article 3(6) of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 that defines insects as farmed animals and therefore restricts their use in insect bioconversion for waste treatment. This is because catering waste cannot be fed to farmed animals. This position is set out in Defra’s animal by-products policy guidance: Supplying and using animal by-products as farm animal feed - GOV.UK.

Earnings and employment outcomes in the Longitudinal Education Outcomes (LEO) official statistics cover all employment and income reported to HMRC, whether from salaried employment, self-employment or freelance work.

The Graduate Outcomes survey publication provides annual pay information for graduates’ main employment during census week, 15 months after graduation. This question is not mandatory and salaries are self-reported, whether salaried work, self-employment or freelanced work. Salary information is published by annual salary bands or medians.

Skills England estimated the workforce size and demand levels in the creative industries sector in their publication ‘Assessment of priority skills in 2030’. This is available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/assessment-of-priority-skills-to-2030/assessment-of-priority-skills-to-2030.

The Government supports the reclassification of medicines where it is safe and appropriate to do so, as this can improve patient access and support selfcare while maintaining high standards of public health protection. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) actively engages with industry to encourage well evidenced reclassification applications and has updated its guidance and processes to provide greater clarity and efficiency.

Reclassification forms part of the MHRA’s wider strategic work to support proportionate regulation and improve access to medicines, including through closer engagement with industry and the use of scientific advice to support high quality applications.

Where successful, reclassification can benefit the National Health Service by reducing pressure on primary care services, enable patients to access appropriate treatments more conveniently through pharmacies or over the counter supply, and deliver wider economic benefits by supporting selfcare and reducing unnecessary healthcare utilisation. Each application is assessed on its individual merits to ensure that any reclassification maintains patient safety and delivers overall public benefit.

However, reclassification is not appropriate in all circumstances. In particular, where the need for ongoing clinical oversight remains important, or where cost or ability to pay could create barriers to equitable access for some patients, prescription supply through the NHS may remain the most appropriate route. Consideration of patient affordability and health inequalities forms part of the overall assessment of whether reclassification is in the public interest.

Ofcom, the independent regulator, has a new duty introduced through the Media Act 2024 to assess audience protection measures used by video-on-demand (VoD) services, such as age ratings, to ensure they are adequate to protect audiences from harm. The Government will in due course be designating mainstream VoD services, bringing them under enhanced regulation by Ofcom. Ofcom will then consult on a new Standards Code for these services, similar to the Broadcasting Code. This could include the use of age ratings, if Ofcom considers it appropriate.

Ofcom, the independent regulator, has a new duty introduced through the Media Act 2024 to assess audience protection measures used by video-on-demand (VoD) services, such as age ratings, to ensure they are adequate to protect audiences from harm. The Government will in due course be designating mainstream VoD services, bringing them under enhanced regulation by Ofcom. Ofcom will then consult on a new Standards Code for these services, similar to the Broadcasting Code. This could include the use of age ratings, if Ofcom considers it appropriate.

The Government has not made an assessment of the child protection benefits of streaming services partnering with the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC). Ofcom, as the independent regulator, now has a new duty introduced through the Media Act 2024 to assess audience protection measures used by video-on-demand (VoD) services, such as age ratings, to ensure they are adequate to protect audiences from harm. The Government will in due course be designating mainstream VoD services, bringing them under enhanced regulation by Ofcom. Ofcom will then consult on a new standards code for these services, similar to the Broadcasting Code. This could include the use of age ratings, if Ofcom considers it appropriate.

The Government has not made an assessment of self-rating partnerships between the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) and video-on-demand (VoD) services. Ofcom, as the independent regulator, now has a new duty introduced through the Media Act 2024 to assess audience protection measures used by VoD services, such as age ratings, to ensure they are adequate to protect audiences from harm. The Government will in due course be designating mainstream VoD services, bringing them under enhanced regulation by Ofcom. Ofcom will then consult on a new standards Code for these services, similar to the Broadcasting Code. This could include the use of age ratings, if Ofcom considers it appropriate.

The Office for National Statistics is independent of ministers, who are therefore unable to require publication of any particular breakdowns, including statistics at 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification codes. DCMS has a strong working relationship with the Office for National Statistics, with significant collaboration between our officials. Through this relationship, we would request rather than require analysis.

We acknowledge the importance of sectoral analysis for monitoring the growth of the creative industries. The Office for National Statistics publishes some data at the 4-digit Standard Industrial Classification code level, such as in their Annual Business Survey, and offers a bespoke data service for requesting additional breakdowns where sample sizes allow. The ONS is bound by the Code of Practice for Statistics to ensure the quality of all estimates is appropriate and that any business data is protected and not identifiable in published statistics. DCMS publishes a portfolio of official statistics about the creative industries, predominantly based on data held by the Office for National Statistics.

Both DCMS and ONS are committed to developing official statistics and ensuring these reflect the needs of users.

Defra recognises certain horticultural growing methods are energy intensive and energy security is critical for these growers. We are working in collaboration across Government departments, including DESNZ, to ensure eligible horticultural businesses are appropriately considered in government energy schemes, funds, and policies.

The GRA’s decisions are made independently of the government, which is important to ensure impartiality. The GRA’s age ratings serve to protect the public and empower people to make informed gaming choices, whilst also recognising and respecting adult freedom of choice within the law. The GRA regularly conducts UK research on aspects of the international PEGI classification criteria for video games.

In most cases, the GRA is able to address issues of potential harm by awarding an appropriate age rating or suggesting changes to a developer’s content to make the game acceptable. However, where this is not possible, a classification may be refused.

Even if material is not in breach of a specific UK law, the GRA may also refuse to classify content,
on harm grounds, when content contains:
● Material that promotes criminal activity, including drugs;
● Material that is illegal or has been created by the commission of a criminal offence;
● Portrayals of children in a sexualised or abusive context;
● Material which makes rape, or other non-consensual sexually violent behaviour, or
sadistic violence look appealing.

The classification system has addressed these issues under successive governments, but decisions regarding the classification of films are made by the BBFC and the Games Rating Authority, not the BBFC, is responsible for the classification of video games. The BBFC’s decisions are made independently of the government, which is important to ensure impartiality. The BBFC’s age ratings serve to protect the public and empower people to make informed viewing choices, whilst also recognising and respecting adult freedom of choice within the law.

The standards underpinning the BBFC’s ratings are set out in their published Classification Guidelines, and are based on consultations every 4-5 years with experts and thousands of members of the public.

If the BBFC finds that a film raises issues or concerns that cannot be addressed through their classification system, they may require compulsory cuts or other changes as a condition of classification.

Codes are created for SNOMED CT by one of the following organisations:

- UK National Release Centre (NRC), hosted by the Technology and Information Standards (TIS) group in NHS England;

- SNOMED International, a not-for-profit organisation that owns, administers and develops SNOMED CT;

- any other NRC in any other SNOMED CT member country.

All requests made to NHS England must be compliant with the Editorial Policy and are processed in accordance with the SNOMED CT UK Edition Governance and Change Request Process. Concepts are added or changed in SNOMED CT by NHS England terminologists in line with International and UK Editorial Principles as defined by SNOMED International at the recommendation of international clinical advisory groups. The authoring process includes a technical quality assurance and peer review. Once the authoring process has been completed and quality assured, the files are published on the Terminology Reference data Update Distribution website.

There is currently a code in SNOMED CT for myalgic encephalomyelitis. The Fully Specified Name (FSN) is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’. The FSN for a code is not intended for use by a clinician. Instead, a clinician is expected to make use of the synonyms for the code, which include myalgic encephalomyelitis.

Clinical systems usually display a ‘preferred term’, deemed to be the most clinically appropriate way of expressing a concept. The preferred term for the code ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome (disorder)’ is ‘Chronic fatigue syndrome’.

NHS England is reviewing the preferred term to align it with the current most clinically appropriate term for the UK, with the preferred term ‘ME/CFS - myalgic encephalomyelitis/ chronic fatigue syndrome’ being considered.