Question follow-through · 6457
HM Coastguard: Conditions of Employment
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent assessment has been made of the sustainability of HM Coastguard relying on approximately 3,000 volunteers receiving expenses only as a result of the removal of hourly remuneration and intention to i
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 Transport
- Tabled
- 3 Jun 2026
- Target answer date
- 8 Jun 2026
- Answer
- 12 Jun 2026 · 9 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 Jun 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent assessment has been made of the sustainability of HM Coastguard relying on approximately 3,000 volunteers receiving expenses only as a result of the removal of hourly remuneration and intention to i
8 Jun 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
12 Jun 2026
Answer published
A Court of Appeal ruling found that the current remuneration model could not legally continue. Public safety remains our priority, and careful consideration was given to the options for a revised operating model. The legal position, the operational implic...
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.