Question follow-through · 16174
Business: Licensing
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of a trader licensing scheme on rogue and fraudulent traders.
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
- 6 Jul 2026
- Target answer date
- 8 Jul 2026
- Answer
- 14 Jul 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
- 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
6 Jul 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of a trader licensing scheme on rogue and fraudulent traders.
8 Jul 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
14 Jul 2026
Answer published
The Government recognises the harm caused by rogue and fraudulent traders to consumers and legitimate businesses.The Department has not made a formal assessment of the impact that a trader licensing scheme would have on rogue and fraudulent traders. This ...
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.