Question follow-through · 13042
Employment Schemes: Older People
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, further to question 119633 entitled Employment Schemes: Older People, what plans he has to measure the effectiveness of the 50 PLUS Champions and Midlife MOT schemes in supporting jobseekers aged 50 and
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 Work and Pensions
- Tabled
- 24 Jun 2026
- Target answer date
- 29 Jun 2026
- Answer
- 1 Jul 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
24 Jun 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, further to question 119633 entitled Employment Schemes: Older People, what plans he has to measure the effectiveness of the 50 PLUS Champions and Midlife MOT schemes in supporting jobseekers aged 50 and
29 Jun 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
1 Jul 2026
Answer published
On 28 May, the department published Evaluation evidence from policies targeted at claimants aged 50 plus - GOV.UK, which evaluated the effectiveness of Additional Work Coach Time for customers aged 50 and over, 50PLUS Champions and the digital Midlife MOT...
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.