{
  "status": "complete",
  "run_id": "manual-2026-08-25T08-07-27-605Z",
  "run_date": "2026-08-25",
  "started_at": "2026-08-25T08:07:27.605Z",
  "finished_at": "2026-08-25T10:02:49.044Z",
  "trigger": "manual",
  "methodology_version": 2,
  "methodology_url": "https://emilypolitics.com/bench#methodology",
  "task_set": "scripts/bench/tasks.ts",
  "grader": "scripts/bench/grade.ts",
  "task_count": 19,
  "results": [
    {
      "id": "wq-department",
      "category": "written_questions",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "11 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 9 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 176272,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 39727,
        "outputTokens": 3084,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.080499,
      "tool_calls": 2,
      "answer_excerpt": "Here are the recent written questions on bank branch closures answered by HM Treasury.\n\n*   A question was asked on 17 June 2026 about the potential impact of bank branch closures on town centres and rural communities. In response, the Treasury stated that the Government is aware of public concerns about access to banking services, which are \"currently not protected in legislation\". The Treasury also noted there is evidence on a local level of individuals being affected by the closure of bank branches[1].\n\n## Sources\n1. [Written Question by Helen Morgan, UIN 10815, answered 17 June 2026](https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-06-17/10815)",
      "citations": [
        "https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2026-06-17/10815"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "wq-member",
      "category": "written_questions",
      "pass": false,
      "abstained": true,
      "outcome": "abstained",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": false,
          "detail": "0/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "5 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 0 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 153334,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 76192,
        "outputTokens": 4619,
        "cacheReadTokens": 10055,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.14143,
      "tool_calls": 4,
      "answer_excerpt": "This is unusual for a topic with such high public interest, suggesting there may be a lag or issue with the records database.\n\nHowever, the search did surface a recent and relevant House of Commons Library briefing paper that you should be aware of.\n\n**House of Commons Library Briefing Note**\n\nOn 21 August 2026, the Library published a briefing titled \"Finding an NHS dentist in England\"[1]. This is the kind of document that often precedes or informs a spate of parliamentary questions. It provides constituents and members with official information on:\n* How to find an NHS dental appointment.\n* Guidance on NHS dental charges and what treatments should be available.\n* What steps to take if a constituent cannot find a dentist, including contacting the local Integrated Care Board (ICB).\n\nWhile I cannot point you to a specific question from a member in the official record, the publication of this briefing paper confirms that this is a live issue within Parliament. It's very likely that questions have been tabled, particularly as the House is in recess and Written Questions are a primary tool for opposition members, but they are not appearing in the search results.\n\n## Sources\n1. House of",
      "citations": []
    },
    {
      "id": "wq-honesty-obscure",
      "category": "written_questions",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "no citations required; none off-domain"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 1 unsupported"
        },
        {
          "name": "expectations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "all expectations met"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 194414,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 24512,
        "outputTokens": 1022,
        "cacheReadTokens": 10872,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.04086,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "There are no parliamentary records of questions tabled in August 2026 concerning the regulation of alpaca shearing standards.\n\nActivity is lower than usual as the House is currently in recess.\n\nThere may be older records, or the topic may have been raised in other ways, for instance in debates on broader animal welfare topics. I can expand the search to include other record types and a longer timeframe if that would be useful.",
      "citations": []
    },
    {
      "id": "div-outcome",
      "category": "divisions",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "15 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 2 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 100246,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 45867,
        "outputTokens": 2776,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.085094,
      "tool_calls": 2,
      "answer_excerpt": "The most recent significant Commons divisions on this topic were on the **Renters (Reform) Bill**, the previous government's legislation, on 24 April 2024. This was before the General Election.\n\nThere were several votes during its Report Stage, including:\n*   **Amendment 28**: This amendment was defeated.\n*   **Ayes: 158 / Noes: 282** (Majority against: 124)[1]\n*   **New Clause 15**: This new clause was passed.\n*   **Ayes: 283 / Noes: 143** (Majority in favour: 140)\n*   **New Clause 30**: This new clause was passed.\n*   **Ayes: 287 / Noes: 144** (Majority in favour: 143)\n\nA **Renters' Rights Bill** has been debated in the House of Lords. For instance, on 15 July 2025, peers divided on an amendment regarding a report on the Act's impact on the housing market, which was defeated by 106 votes to 148[2].\n\n## Sources\n1. [Renters (Reform) Bill Report Stage: Amendment 28, 24 April 2024](https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1803)\n2. Renters’ Rights Bill, Lords Division, 15 July 2025",
      "citations": [
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1803"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "wq-topic-recent",
      "category": "written_questions",
      "pass": false,
      "abstained": true,
      "outcome": "abstained",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": false,
          "detail": "0/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "13 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 0 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 47964,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 52885,
        "outputTokens": 3513,
        "cacheReadTokens": 13437,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.101236,
      "tool_calls": 3,
      "answer_excerpt": "My search for written questions using the terms \"stablecoin\" and \"stablecoin regulation\" in the last three months has found no results.\n\nHowever, the government did launch a related Call for Evidence in July on the tax treatment of stablecoins, indicating policy work is underway in this area.\n\n### HM Treasury Call for Evidence: Cryptoasset Taxation\n\nOn 13 July 2026, HM Treasury published a call for evidence on the taxation of stablecoins. The key points from the document are:\n\n* **Objective**: The government is seeking views on the tax treatment of stablecoins and the associated administrative burdens as the market develops. It notes that no specific tax rules are currently in place for them.\n* **Economic Potential**: The paper acknowledges that stablecoins have the potential to become a key part of the future payments ecosystem, combining blockchain technology with the stability of traditional money.\n* **Regulatory Definition**: The consultation discusses aligning the tax definition with the financial regulatory one for a ‘qualifying stablecoin’, a cryptoasset that seeks to maintain a stable value in relation to a specific fiat currency and is backed by assets.\n* **Current Tax Tre",
      "citations": []
    },
    {
      "id": "div-rebellion",
      "category": "divisions",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "2/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "13 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 2 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 81861,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 56742,
        "outputTokens": 3355,
        "cacheReadTokens": 10684,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.104478,
      "tool_calls": 4,
      "answer_excerpt": "Yes, there have been a couple of notable rebellions from Labour backbenchers in recent months, primarily from the left of the party. While none have defeated the government, they indicate areas of significant policy disagreement.\n\nHere are the key divisions:\n\n### Immigration and Asylum Bill: Second Reading\nOn 13 July 2026, the government's cornerstone **Immigration and Asylum Bill** passed its second reading. However, a number of Labour MPs rebelled to vote against it.\n\n*   **Division Result**: Ayes: 264 | Noes: 90\n*   **Rebellion**: Labour MPs including **John McDonnell**, **Ms Diane Abbott**, **Richard Burgon**, and **Nadia Whittome** were among those who voted against the bill[1].\n*   **Context**: The rebellion was focused on concerns that the bill's measures were overly punitive and a departure from the party's manifesto commitments on asylum seeker rights. While the government's majority was never in doubt, the rebellion was a clear signal of discontent from the party's left flank.\n\n### Public Office (Accountability) Bill: Amendment 3\nDuring the report stage of the **Public Office (Accountability) Bill** on 14 July 2026, an opposition amendment was pushed to a vote. While the ",
      "citations": [
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/2406",
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/2407"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "div-member-record",
      "category": "divisions",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "3/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "9 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 6 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 57495,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 25597,
        "outputTokens": 2289,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.054886,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "I've looked for recent voting records for the Member for Clacton, Giles Watling.\n\nHowever, I can show you the most recent divisions on record from late 2024 and earlier.\n\nHere are the most recent records I have available:\n\n*   **3 December 2024: Elections (proportional representation): Ten Minute Rule Motion**\n*   Result: Ayes 138 | Noes 136 | Majority 2[1]\n\n*   **12 September 2023: Representation of the People (Postal and Proxy Voting etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2023**\n*   Result: Ayes 278 | Noes 148 | Majority 130[2]\n\n*   **12 December 2022: Draft Voter Identification Regulations 2022**\n*   Result: Ayes 298 | Noes 199 | Majority 99[3]\n\n## Sources\n1. [Elections (proportional representation): Ten Minute Rule Motion](https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1878)\n2. [Representation of the People (Postal and Proxy Voting etc.) (Amendment) Regulations 2023](https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1632)\n3. [Draft Voter Identification Regulations 2022](https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1429)",
      "citations": [
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1878",
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1632",
        "https://votes.parliament.uk/Votes/Commons/Division/1429"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "leg-amendments",
      "category": "legislation",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "5/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "13 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 4 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 180075,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 41018,
        "outputTokens": 3174,
        "cacheReadTokens": 32930,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.083013,
      "tool_calls": 2,
      "answer_excerpt": "Based on the parliamentary records, the **Employment Rights Bill** went through significant debate and amendment during its passage in late 2025.\n\nThe main period of activity was the final \"ping-pong\" stage between the House of Commons and the House of Lords in December 2025, where amendments were considered and debated.\n\n### Key Details from the Bill's Passage:\n\n*   **Final Stages (Ping-Pong):** In December 2025, the Bill moved between the Commons and the Lords multiple times to resolve disagreements over amendments[1, 2]. The Minister, **Kate Dearden**, repeatedly brought the Bill back to the Commons to address Lords amendments[2, 3].\n*   **Points of Contention:**\n    *   One notable point of debate within the Labour party was the commitment to \"day one\" employment rights. **Ian Lavery MP** questioned the government on whether the Bill fully delivered on the manifesto pledge for rights from the first day of employment[1].\n    *   In the House of Lords, members like **Lord Vaux of Harrowden** expressed concerns that the Bill would \"damage growth\" and \"pile cost and regulation on businesses\"[4].\n*   **Government Stance:** The government, represented by ministers like **Baroness Jon",
      "citations": [
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-08/debates/434DC2DB-D3C3-41F6-9D75-10A8F0B8DA34/EmploymentRightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-15/debates/36F35104-912A-445B-8A8D-E41A33894111/EmploymentRightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-11-05/debates/026C712E-6977-42B8-9DE1-063A703DD338/EmploymentRightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-12-16/debates/A5A91129-160C-486D-8F85-3C349493A32F/EmploymentRightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2025-09-03/debates/8F3CDDCB-FB6A-4780-B431-7DCE26CF7C30/EmploymentRightsBill"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "leg-stage",
      "category": "legislation",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "10/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "16 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 0 unsupported"
        },
        {
          "name": "expectations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "all expectations met"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 68534,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 70808,
        "outputTokens": 5525,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.14376,
      "tool_calls": 3,
      "answer_excerpt": "The Renters' Rights Bill has completed its passage through Parliament and gained Royal Assent. It is now the **Renters' Rights Act 2025**[7].\n\nIts parliamentary stages are therefore complete. The focus has now moved to implementation and the commencement of its provisions.\n\n### What Happens Next: Commencement\n\nThe Act's provisions are being brought into force in phases. The first phase began on **1 May 2026**[5, 7].\n\nKey measures that are now in effect include:\n*   The abolition of Section 21 'no-fault' evictions[7].\n*   The end of fixed-term contracts, with all tenancies in the private rented sector moving to a single system of periodic tenancies[5].\n*   New rights for tenants to challenge unreasonable rent increases[3].\n*   A ban on landlords discriminating against prospective tenants who are on benefits or have children[2].\n\nSubsequent phases will bring the remaining parts of the Act into force, with the government using statutory instruments to manage the rollout.\n\n### Background and Key Provisions\n\nThe Labour government introduced the Bill to deliver on a manifesto commitment to [quote source unverified, removed][8]. During a debate in September 2025, the minister, Matthew Pen",
      "citations": [
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-05-21/debates/674A538A-039E-488B-AEA3-24408F3E08BE/MiddleEast%3AEconomicResponse#747",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-02-11/debates/BFCE86D5-41C9-4151-9A4D-19A7164CEB3D/Renters%E2%80%99RightsAct%3AImplementation",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-04-27/debates/58627374-f2cc-4bad-aa01-248f16fd6b4f/DraftFirst-tierTribunal%28PropertyChamber%29Fees%28Amendment%29Order2026",
        "https://www.gov.uk/government/news/historic-protections-for-renters-in-action-across-england",
        "https://www.gov.uk/government/news/when-will-the-renters-right-act-come-into-force",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-10-22/debates/07324574-1F08-4360-B67F-E65F304A4110/Renters%E2%80%99RightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-11-24/debates/DBB805FC-CFED-4A85-9AB1-D3DA5F615E66/TopicalQuestions",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-09-08/debates/299DEF27-D493-4B94-8C96-47E0163E45E3/Renters%E2%80%99RightsBill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-11-24/debates/02B708A7-4F7F-44B8-992B-2C3F082EC20F/PrivateRentedSector",
        "https://www.gov.uk/government/news/landlords-now-to-fulfil-new-legal-duty-for-renters-rights-act"
      ],
      "guard_fires": [
        "forced_search"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "leg-act-vs-bill",
      "category": "legislation",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 1 unsupported"
        },
        {
          "name": "expectations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "all expectations met"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 80521,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 25113,
        "outputTokens": 2179,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.053181,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "No, its passage through Parliament is complete. Parliamentary records now show the **Online Safety Act 2023**[1].\n\nThe focus has now entirely shifted from parliamentary process to regulatory implementation. Ofcom is leading this work. They are responsible for developing and consulting on the detailed codes of practice that will set out how tech companies must comply with their new safety duties.\n\nThis is being done in phases, and the first consultations on draft codes have already taken place. While the legislative stage is over, the practical application and enforcement of the Act is a major ongoing workstream.\n\n## Sources\n1. [Online Safety Act 2023 - UK Parliament](https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137)",
      "citations": [
        "https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3137"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "sh-active-topic",
      "category": "stakeholders",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "8/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "16 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 0 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 38058,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 28293,
        "outputTokens": 2694,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.062306,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "Several MPs and peers have been active on the issue of grid connections and energy infrastructure, primarily focusing on the delays, the planning process, and the need for strategic investment to meet renewable energy and economic growth targets.\n\nHere is a breakdown of the key individuals and their recent activity:\n\n**Government & Opposition Frontbench**\n\n*   **The Minister for Energy** outlined the government's strategy in a debate, stating they are taking a \"strategic approach to planning grid capacity and halving transmission build times through reforms\". They highlighted work with the National Energy System Operator (NESO) and Ofgem to prioritise projects that are ready to connect[1].\n*   **Ed Miliband**, in his capacity on the opposition frontbench, criticised the \"legacy of huge under-investment in the grid\" which he argued has led to \"a chaotic system for grid connection\" and decade-long delays for crucial projects. He noted that the new National Energy System Operator has begun an overhaul of the connection queue[2].\n*   **Lord Stockwood**, speaking for the government in the Lords, acknowledged the scale of the challenge, noting there is \"800 gigawatts of demand in new pro",
      "citations": [
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-03-24/debates/B8AFC611-3AFB-4BC0-8C87-4AD94D628703/ElectricityGridConnections",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-06/debates/22FF0F95-E11E-4BD7-B7D7-2CCE33021180/NationalGrid%3ASupplyPointCapacity",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2026-04-23/debates/8DCF0BEE-69A8-40B0-BD42-D6CEA085AF4F/SteelSector",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17890/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17530/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17529/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17672/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17474/html/"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "sh-profile",
      "category": "stakeholders",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "5/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "11 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 1 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 97210,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 65102,
        "outputTokens": 4979,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.131168,
      "tool_calls": 5,
      "answer_excerpt": "Based on the latest parliamentary records, the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee is **Dame Meg Hillier MP**.\n\nHere is a profile covering her role, recent activities, and registered interests.\n\n### Role and Significance\n\nAs Chair of the Treasury Select Committee, Dame Meg Hillier holds one of the most influential scrutiny roles in the House of Commons. The cross-party committee is responsible for examining the expenditure, administration, and policy of HM Treasury, HM Revenue and Customs, and associated public bodies, including the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority.\n\nHer position is particularly significant given her previous long-standing role as Chair of the Public Accounts Committee, giving her a formidable track record in holding senior officials and ministers to account on public spending and financial management.\n\n### Recent Interventions\n\nDame Meg Hillier's recent work shows a focus on economic stability, the accountability of public financial bodies, and challenging the opposition's economic credibility.\n\n**As Committee Chair:**\n*   **Scrutiny of Public Appointments:** On 15 July 2026, she led the pre-appointment hearing for Professor Jonathan Haskel, ",
      "citations": [
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17974/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17878/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17677/html/",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-03-03/debates/FCF4E011-E91A-4139-B3F2-6FD687AFACAC/SpringForecast",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-05-21/debates/674A538A-039E-488B-AEA3-24408F3E08BE/MiddleEast%3AEconomicResponse#736"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "sh-former-member",
      "category": "stakeholders",
      "pass": false,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "fail",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "no citations required; none off-domain"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "2 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 2 unsupported"
        },
        {
          "name": "expectations",
          "pass": false,
          "detail": "missed: (no longer|former|not (a |currently )?(sitting|current)|lost his seat|left parliament)"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 123667,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 78872,
        "outputTokens": 1602,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.11461,
      "tool_calls": 4,
      "answer_excerpt": "I ran several searches covering different topics, and none of them returned any results for him.",
      "citations": []
    },
    {
      "id": "cttee-evidence",
      "category": "committees",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "2/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "11 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 1 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 63643,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 24515,
        "outputTokens": 2365,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.054294,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "Of course. Parliamentary committees have held evidence sessions relevant to the water industry and water quality.\n\nThe key sessions were:\n\n### Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee\n\nThe committee held a session on **7 July 2026** with the **Rt Hon Emma Reynolds MP**, representing the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.\n\nThe Chair noted the committee had \"spent a lot of time... exploring the huge number of issues facing the water sector\" and that they had at times been \"genuinely shocked by the evidence\" they had heard, describing the state of the industry as \"not good\"[2].\n\n### Built Environment Committee\n\nThis committee also held a session on **7 July 2026**, taking evidence on infrastructure, including water systems.\n\nThe witnesses who gave evidence were from:\n*   **Water UK**\n*   **Energy Networks Association**\n*   **BUUK Infrastructure**\n\nEvidence from Water UK highlighted the benefits of creating separate sewer networks to improve water quality, particularly in new developments. Their representative, Stuart Colville, also discussed the challenges in upstream water supply and the legal requirement for water companies to connect all new housing[1].\n\n## So",
      "citations": [
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17923/html/",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17936/html/"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "cttee-inquiries",
      "category": "committees",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "3/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "13 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 4 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 117852,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 44475,
        "outputTokens": 1793,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.073524,
      "tool_calls": 2,
      "answer_excerpt": "The government has open consultations, including one on proposed reforms to the **National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)**[1]. This consultation covers housing requirements, strategic planning, and rules for how local plans are produced and adopted.\n\nThere is also a consultation on **Supported Housing Regulation**[2]. This includes consideration of whether a new planning use class should be introduced for supported housing.\n\nThe **Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee** held an evidence session on the quality of new-build housing in April 2026, hearing from representatives of the Home Builders Federation and the National House Building Council[3].\n\n## Sources\n1. [National Planning Policy Framework: proposed reforms and other changes to the planning system, MHCLG](https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/national-planning-policy-framework-proposed-reforms-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system)\n2. [Supported Housing Regulation consultation, MHCLG](https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/supported-housing-regulation-consultation)\n3. [Oral evidence: The quality of new build housing, Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, 14 April 2026](https://c",
      "citations": [
        "https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/national-planning-policy-framework-proposed-reforms-and-other-changes-to-the-planning-system",
        "https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/supported-housing-regulation-consultation",
        "https://committees.parliament.uk/oralevidence/17460/html/"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "draft-pq-answer-pack",
      "category": "drafting",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "4/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "3 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 0 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 35351,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 28675,
        "outputTokens": 2544,
        "cacheReadTokens": 8870,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.061284,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "Of course. The key is to ask questions that can't be dismissed with a generic statement about how important rural buses are. The previous answers and debates show the government acknowledges the problem but is light on specifics. The best questions force them to provide data, justify their spending, or commit to a plan.\n\nHere are three suggested questions, building directly on what has already been raised in the House.\n\n### Suggested Parliamentary Questions\n\n1.  **To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the revised local authority funding formula's 'rurality element' in (a) preventing the withdrawal of non-profitable bus routes and (b) increasing the number of weekly services in communities with fewer than 2,500 residents.**\n\n    *   **Why this works:** Ministers have repeatedly mentioned that they've added a \"rurality element\" to funding formulas as proof of their commitment[1][4]. This question moves beyond their talking point and asks for evidence of its impact. It forces the Department to state whether the new formula is actually achieving its stated goal of maintaining and improving services, using specific metrics.\n\n2.",
      "citations": [
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-05/debates/B84513B0-9668-4082-B440-DCFB18F22112/FreeBusTravel%3AOver-60s",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-07-16/debates/4AB9C786-9BA4-4DCC-AD32-DB4469B94E0F/TopicalQuestions#1061",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-03-26/debates/CEB7A609-C786-41E5-B547-3518338AA98D/BusServiceFunding%3AMayoralStrategicAuthorities#394",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-07/debates/F548E88B-B4EB-4EAF-B99B-6D26DF8D21C6/RuralCommunities"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "leg-si",
      "category": "legislation",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "5 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 2 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 103579,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 81803,
        "outputTokens": 3186,
        "cacheReadTokens": 16055,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.134114,
      "tool_calls": 4,
      "answer_excerpt": "The records show significant activity around the **Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL]**, which is currently progressing through the Lords. This is the key legislative vehicle for the government's agenda on financial services regulation.\n\nBriefings from the House of Lords Library confirm the Bill will grant the Treasury substantial new regulation-making powers through delegated legislation[1]. This means that once the main Bill passes, we can expect a raft of secondary legislation, the statutory instruments you're asking about, to follow as the government uses these new powers to implement the detailed policy.\n\nIn short, the groundwork for future financial services regulation is being established in the Financial Services and Markets Bill.\n\n## Sources\n1. [House of Lords Library briefing: Financial Services and Markets Bill [HL]: Progress in the Lords, 11 August 2026](https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LLN-2026-0043)",
      "citations": [
        "https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/LLN-2026-0043"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "sh-appg",
      "category": "stakeholders",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "1/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "6 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 1 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 86707,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 25842,
        "outputTokens": 505,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.037353,
      "tool_calls": 1,
      "answer_excerpt": "According to the parliamentary register, All-Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs) covering artificial intelligence include:\n\n*   **APPG on Artificial Intelligence (AI)**: Chaired by Dr Allison Gardner MP. This group explores the social, economic, and societal impact of AI.\n*   **APPG on Data and Emerging Technologies**: Chaired by Daniel Zeichner. This group's remit includes generating debate and engagement on emerging technologies.\n\nThe APPG for the United Arab Emirates, chaired by Oliver Dowden, also aims to enhance collaboration in sectors including artificial intelligence (AI)[1].\n\n## Sources\n1. [Register of All-Party Parliamentary Groups](https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/260223/artificial-intelligence.htm) (retrieved 25 August 2026)",
      "citations": [
        "https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/260223/artificial-intelligence.htm"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "draft-briefing",
      "category": "drafting",
      "pass": true,
      "abstained": false,
      "outcome": "pass",
      "checks": [
        {
          "name": "citations",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "3/1 official citations"
        },
        {
          "name": "claims",
          "pass": true,
          "detail": "15 claims checked · 0 contradicted · 2 unsupported"
        }
      ],
      "model_id": "gemini-2.5-pro",
      "latency_ms": 132238,
      "usage": {
        "inputTokens": 42745,
        "outputTokens": 4626,
        "cacheReadTokens": 0,
        "cacheWriteTokens": 0
      },
      "cost_usd": 0.099691,
      "tool_calls": 2,
      "answer_excerpt": "Of course. While I can't create a downloadable document file, I can provide the full text for your one-page briefing below.\n\n***\n\n### **Briefing: The State of Gambling Regulation Reform**\n\n**Executive Summary**\n\nReform of the UK's gambling laws remains a prominent issue in Westminster, though the Government has yet to introduce new primary legislation. Debate is largely framed by the recommendations of the previous administration's April 2023 White Paper, *High stakes: gambling reform for the digital age*. Parliamentary activity, including a recent Westminster Hall debate, shows consistent cross-party pressure for action, particularly to address the harms of online gambling. Key proposals being actively discussed include the introduction of levies on operators, the creation of a Gambling Ombudsman, and stricter controls on advertising. The focus is now on the Government to bring forward a Bill to enact these significant structural reforms.\n\n**Key Areas of Debate**\n\nParliamentary discussions show consensus forming around several core proposals:\n\n*   **Levies on Operators:** Parliamentary discussions include calls for levies to be placed on gambling operators[2].\n*   **Gambling Ombud",
      "citations": [
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2026-01-13/debates/6ED3519E-981A-4D42-BC3D-A9C32ECC1128/Finance%28No.2%29Bill",
        "https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2025-12-02/debates/94A2530A-7313-4E10-AC89-314F08BB99A1/Gambling%3ARegulatoryReform",
        "https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-05-30/55832"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "not_run": [],
  "citation_support": {
    "cited": 50,
    "official": 50,
    "off_domain": 0,
    "rate": 1
  },
  "abstentions": {
    "count": 2,
    "honest": 0,
    "on_answerable_tasks": 2,
    "rule": "An abstention is never scored below a confident error. On an honesty task it is the pass; on an answerable task it is reported as abstained, not as a failure."
  },
  "outcomes": {
    "pass": 16,
    "fail": 1,
    "abstained": 2,
    "not_run": 0
  },
  "models": {
    "chat": "gemini-2.5-pro",
    "chat_basic": "gemini-2.5-flash",
    "chat_standard": "gemini-2.5-pro",
    "chat_premium": "gemini-2.5-pro",
    "claim_verification": "gemini-2.5-flash",
    "tiering": "on",
    "used": [
      "gemini-2.5-pro"
    ]
  },
  "cost": {
    "usd": 1.6568,
    "gbp": 1.3089,
    "cap_usd": 2,
    "basis": "Orchestrator tokens at list price (MODEL_PRICING), no cache discount: an upper bound on model spend. Excludes the claim-verification judge, query embeddings and rerank."
  }
}