Question follow-through · 121243
Energy: Conservation
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether his department has made any impact assessment on the relationship between intermittent funding cycles and the quality of retrofit delivery outcomes.
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 Energy Security and Net Zero
- Tabled
- 16 Mar 2026
- Target answer date
- 18 Mar 2026
- Answer
- 24 Mar 2026 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 4 · 1 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 2 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
16 Mar 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, whether his department has made any impact assessment on the relationship between intermittent funding cycles and the quality of retrofit delivery outcomes.
18 Mar 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
24 Mar 2026
Answer published
The Government understands the value of providing long-term certainty wherever possible to support the supply chain, local authorities, and social housing providers to invest, train, and plan accordingly. That’s why, as part of the £15 billion Warm Homes ...
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.