25 November 2024, Chris Bryant MP, then Minister responsible in DCMS met StubHub representatives to discuss potential secondary ticketing reforms.

17 March 2025, Justin Madders MP and Chris Bryant MP, then Ministers responsible, met Viagogo and StubHub representatives as part of a wider meeting with key stakeholders to discuss the consultation on ticket resale and call for evidence on pricing practices.

Officials met Viagogo and StubHub during policy development on the secondary ticketing policy on 22 August, 11 September and 31 October 2024, 18 November 2025 and 20 May 2026.

My Lords, the Supreme Court ruling that the noble Lord’s Question refers to brings clarity for women and service providers. We expect all duty bearers to follow the law and to seek legal advice where necessary, and that includes government departments. Departments have been reviewing and updating their policies and guidance following the Supreme Court ruling. This includes the new internal Civil Service guidance that has been shared with departments. We will ensure that any policies and guidance are consistent with the draft code of practice for services, public functions and associations that was laid in Parliament before the Recess.

My Lords, the Supreme Court ruling brings clarity for women and service providers. We expect all duty bearers to follow the law and seek legal advice where necessary, and this includes government departments. Departments have been updating policies following the Supreme Court ruling. Internal Civil Service guidance is also currently under review. We will ensure that any guidance is consistent with the code of practice for services, public functions and associations.

My Lords, the Minister is following the process in the Equality Act 2006 and is consulting the Scottish and Welsh Ministers. As set out in the Act, the EHRC operates independently of the Government and is responsible for drafting the code

and consulting such persons it thinks appropriate. It consulted on the code from 2 October 2024 to 3 January 2025, and again from 20 May 2025 to 30 June 2025 on updates to the code.

We have always been clear that we support the For Women Scotland ruling, and the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission - as the independent regulator - has submitted a draft Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations to Ministers, and we are working as quickly as we can to review it with the care it deserves. This will provide further guidance to duty bearers on how they should comply with the Equality Act 2010 following the Supreme Court ruling.

In the meantime, we expect duty bearers to implement the ruling and seek specialist legal advice where necessary.

It is for duty bearers to determine the most suitable procedures for reviewing their policies.

We have always been clear that we support the For Women Scotland ruling, and the protection of single-sex spaces based on biological sex.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission - as the independent regulator - has submitted a draft Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations to Ministers, and we are working as quickly as we can to review it with the care it deserves. This will provide further guidance to duty bearers on how they should comply with the Equality Act 2010 following the Supreme Court ruling.

In the meantime, we expect duty bearers to implement the ruling and seek specialist legal advice where necessary.

It is for duty bearers to determine the most suitable procedures for reviewing their policies.

My Lords, the Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations provides guidance on all protected characteristics, not solely sex and gender reassignment. The Government are considering the draft updated code, and if the decision is made to approve it, the Secretary of State will lay it before Parliament. Parliament will then have 40 days to consider the draft code. It is important that the correct process for considering the code is followed to ensure that the Secretary of State can make an informed decision.

Since the publication of the publication of the Independent Review of Data, Statistics and Research on Sex and Gender there has also been a Supreme Court judgement on the definition of sex within the Equality Act. We recognise the importance of accurate and consistent recording of data on sex and gender and are considering the implications for administrative data systems in policing as part of the 2026/27 Annual Data Requirement which is currently in development.

The Sullivan Review sets out a number of recommendations in relation to the collection of data on sex and gender identity. We are considering these in light of ongoing related work around data harmonisation standards. As all public bodies, and therefore all public data and statistics, were in scope for the review, it’s important we consider the findings in collaborative way across government.

The Government Statistical Service (GSS) Harmonisation Programme, a cross-government work programme looking to improve the comparability and coherence of data and statistics, is developing harmonised standards for sex and gender identity.

NHS England is leading work to develop the United Information Standard of Protected Characteristics, which focusses on the Equality Act 2010’s nine protected characteristics, including both sex and gender reassignment.

Through the Health and Care Statistics Leadership Forum, a group convening statistical leaders across health organisations at the national level to ensure statistical collaboration and coherence, there is work ongoing to catalogue, and improve descriptions of how sex and gender data is collected within our statistical publications, and ensure labelling accurately describes the data being collected.

Sex and gender identity are not always the same thing, and it is important for patients that we record both accurately. We are committed to delivering safe and holistic care for both adults and children when it comes to gender, and that also means accurately recording biological sex, not just for research and insight, but also for patient safety.

On 20 March, the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care instructed the health service to immediately suspend applications for National Health Service number changes for under 18s, to safeguard children. It was completely wrong that children's NHS numbers can be changed if they change gender. Children's safety must come first.

We remain committed to recording, recognising and respecting people’s gender identity where these differ from their biological sex. General practitioners are currently able to rename a patient and manually input preferred pronouns and expressed gender in free text without affecting the formal marker.

Our guidance to local authorities on the collection of Client Level Data is under review to ensure it adheres to the advice in the Review of data, statistics and research on sex and gender. We are also awaiting guidance from the Government Statistical Service on harmonisations of sex and gender identity data.

The 2023 Directions set out national data requirements and do not necessarily cover all the information that local authorities collect to effectively discharge their statutory obligations.

The current gender pay gap reporting guidance was drafted in order to reduce the burden on business, and be mindful of variations in their data collection processes.

We are aware of the recommendations relating to gender pay gap reporting in the Review of Data, Statistics and Research on Sex and Gender. We recognise that the recent Supreme Court judgment has also changed the landscape in this area. We are currently reviewing the guidance in light of this judgment to ensure it is accurate.

The College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council are currently undertaking a review of non-crime hate incidents, working closely with the Home Office. The Government look forward to receiving the final recommendations of this review shortly and to working with police forces to ensure they have the clarity they need to focus on keeping our communities safe while protecting the fundamental right to free speech.

We are restoring order to the asylum system so that every part – border security, case processing, appeals and returns – operate swiftly.

We are using a range of technologies, including Artificial Intelligence, to improve staff productivity.

We doubled the rate of decision-making. The first half of this year saw the second and third highest quarters for decision-making since records began.

Statistics on the full asylum WIP is published in table ASY_03 on GOV.UK in the ‘Immigration and Protection data’, as part of the ‘Migration Transparency data’. The total number of cases in the asylum system relates to both those awaiting an initial decision and those who have appealed and are waiting a further outcome. The latest published data relates to the year ending June 2024.

As at 30 June 2025, there were 70,532 cases awaiting an initial decision.

The average time taken to process claims is not currently available from published statistics. Statistics regarding the age of asylum claims awaiting an initial decision is published in table Asy_D03 of the ‘Asylum claims awaiting a decision detailed datasets’. The latest data relates to the year ending June 2025.We have increased the speed at which cases are processed, with 42% of claims received in 2024 Q4 being processed within 6 months, by comparison, 7% of claims received in 2023 Q4 were processed within 6 months.

By transforming the asylum system, we will clear the backlog of claims and appeals.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on completed court cases for a wide range of offences in England and Wales within the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics.

However, data centrally held does not identify whether offences were committed by Palestine Action activists. Whilst this information may be held in court records, examining individual records would be of disproportionate cost.

The Government does not routinely comment on intelligence and security matters and it would be inappropriate for the Government to provide a running commentary on documentation before the High Court in the Palestine Action judicial review proceedings

Palestine Action has conducted an escalating campaign involving not just sustained criminal damage, including to Britain’s national security infrastructure, but also intimidation and, more recently, alleged violence, including the use of weapons resulting in serious injuries to individuals. That kind of activity puts the safety and security of the public at risk.

Palestine Action has claimed responsibility for attacks which have seen those allegedly involved charged with criminal damage, violent disorder, aggravated burglary, grievous bodily harm with intent, and actual bodily harm. The gravity of these incidents is demonstrated by the Crown Prosecution Service’s independent decision to submit to the court that the offences allegedly committed by individuals in certain attacks had a terrorism connection.

The Government currently have no plans to amend the existing legislation. Palestine Action has satisfied the test in the Terrorism Act 2000, having conducted an escalating campaign involving intimidation and sustained criminal damage. Some of its members have been charged with serious and violent offences. In passing, I thank the police for their professionalism in policing recent protests. The House should note that there were 17 arrests for assaults on police officers at the demonstration on 6 September, which is totally unacceptable.

Inivos Ltd were not recommended to the Government through the priority personal protective equipment lane, also known as the high priority lane. Inivos Ltd are included in the publication PPE procurement in the early pandemic on the GOV.UK website, under the New Buy section, although the company name has been misspelled as Invios. The Department will seek to correct this error at the earliest opportunity.

Making Tax Digital (MTD) for Income Tax quarterly updates are not the same as full tax returns. They are simple summaries of income and expenses. Software will automatically draw data from a taxpayer’s digital records, and, where these are up to date, the updates will be quick and easy to submit.

Quarterly updates will reduce errors by moving record-keeping closer to real time underpinning the £1.95bn of Additional Tax Revenue that MTD for Income Tax is expected to generate by 2029/30.

They also enable estimates of tax liability as well as nudges and prompts to support users to get their tax right. With records captured digitally in software, preparing the end-of-year return should be more straightforward, as the information needed is already available.

The Government does not hold central data on how many criminal cases are designated as being aggravated by a terrorism connection.

When deciding what sentence to impose, the courts take into account the circumstances of the offence and any aggravating and mitigating factors, in line with any relevant guidelines from the independent Sentencing Council. This will include consideration of cases aggravated by a terrorism connection and whether an increase in the sentence length is required.

The content referred by DSIT's National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT) to social media platforms serve as examples of narratives which are assessed as likely to violate terms of service and sit within NSOIT’s ministerially agreed national security and public safety remit. It is up to platforms to decide whether the referred content violates their policies and what action, if any, to take with those referred examples: government cannot compel platforms to remove legal content. The proportion of content removed from platforms depends on independent decisions made by platforms or users as to whether they wish to remove the content.

The National Security Online Information Team’s (NSOIT) agreed remit is to analyse narratives and trends from publicly available information online relating to national security and public safety, where ministers agree there is a high risk to UK audiences from mis and disinformation. This remit and the work of NSOIT is kept under review by ministers. NSOIT looks at threats posed by foreign states, risks to elections and risks arising from the use of AI and deepfakes.