Question follow-through · 61461
Small Businesses: Business Rates
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether her Department plans to introduce additional support measures for small businesses affected by increases in business rates in London boroughs.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Treasury
- Tabled
- 19 Jun 2025
- Target answer date
- 23 Jun 2025
- Answer
- 27 Jun 2025 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
19 Jun 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether her Department plans to introduce additional support measures for small businesses affected by increases in business rates in London boroughs.
23 Jun 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
27 Jun 2025
Answer published
The Government is committed to creating a fairer business rates system that supports small businesses and protects the high street. To deliver our manifesto pledge, we intend to introduce permanently lower tax rates for retail, hospitality, and leisure (R...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.