Question follow-through · 89810
Ammunition: Factories
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to page 6 of the Strategic Defence Review 2025, published on 2 June 2025, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of locating at least one of the proposed always-on munition
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Ministry of Defence
- Tabled
- 11 Nov 2025
- Target answer date
- 13 Nov 2025
- Answer
- 19 Nov 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
- Opposition Day Motion: Defence spending and readiness - Prime Minister's Amendment · 23 Jun 2026
- Opposition day: Defence spending and readiness · 23 Jun 2026
- Armed Forces Bill Report Stage: Amendment 11 · 22 Jun 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
11 Nov 2025
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to page 6 of the Strategic Defence Review 2025, published on 2 June 2025, what assessment his Department has made of the potential merits of locating at least one of the proposed always-on munition
13 Nov 2025
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
19 Nov 2025
Answer published
We are committed to ensuring the Defence industry is an engine for growth through strengthened industrial relationships and domestic investment. As published in the UK Defence Footprint the North East region has seen £178 million of Defence spending in 20...
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.