Question follow-through · 110359
British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme: Metals
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department had made of the potential merits of including the metals recycling industry on the list of eligible sectors for the forthcoming British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme.
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Business and Trade
- Tabled
- 3 Feb 2026
- Target answer date
- 5 Feb 2026
- Answer
- 10 Feb 2026 · 7 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
3 Feb 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department had made of the potential merits of including the metals recycling industry on the list of eligible sectors for the forthcoming British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme.
5 Feb 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
10 Feb 2026
Answer published
The Government recently closed a consultation on eligibility for the British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme (BICS) where businesses were invited to share their views on the proposed methodology. Decisions on eligibility will now be taken to ensure the ...
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.