Question follow-through · 112955
Gold: Sudan
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the regulatory framework governing the import of gold linked to conflict and human rights abuses; what steps his Department is taking to improve over
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
- 11 Feb 2026
- Target answer date
- 23 Feb 2026
- Answer
- 26 Feb 2026 · 15 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
11 Feb 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the regulatory framework governing the import of gold linked to conflict and human rights abuses; what steps his Department is taking to improve over
23 Feb 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
26 Feb 2026
Answer published
The trade of illicit gold linked to conflict undermines the rule of law and has no place in UK supply chains and our global economy. The Government engages with the gold industry, in particular the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) and the World Go...
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.