Coronavirus: Self-Employment Income Support Scheme
To support the self-employed through the coronavirus outbreak the Government has introduced the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS).

This pack has been prepared ahead of the debate to be held in the Commons Chamber on Monday 20 May 2019 on medical cannabis under prescription. The subject for the debate has been selected by the Backbench Business Committee and the motion for the debate is in the names of Sir Mike Penning MP and Tonia Antoniazzi MP.
Commons Library debate pack - Medicinal cannabis under prescription (250 KB , PDF)
The motion to be debated is
That this House re-affirms its welcome of the change in the law which allows for access to medical cannabis under prescription but notes that only a handful of prescriptions for whole plant extract medical cannabis have been issued on the NHS which has left a significant number of patients, many of them children with intractable epilepsy, with no access causing significant distress; and calls on the Government to take further immediate action to ensure that medical cannabis is made available to appropriate patients, in particular to the children suffering severe intractable epilepsy similar such as that afflicting children like such as Alfie Dingley whose plight and campaign did so much to secure the change in the law.
Please see the Commons Library’s Briefing Paper on Medical use of cannabis in conjunction with this pack.
Commons Library debate pack - Medicinal cannabis under prescription (250 KB , PDF)
To support the self-employed through the coronavirus outbreak the Government has introduced the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS).
This Library briefing paper explains the types of coronavirus restrictions and requirements that have been imposed by the UK's lockdown laws. Currently no restrictions on domestic movement, gatherings or business opening/service limits are in place in any part of the UK.
To meet demand for Covid-19 vaccines, some countries have argued for a waiver on intellectual property rights for vaccines. This paper sets out the debate.