Crime and Policing Bill

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 18th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Viscount Colville of Culross (CB)]

My Lords, I support Amendment 422D and the consequential Amendments 434 to 437, to which I have added my name. In Amendment 429B the Government have gone far to respond to concerns over AI-generated harms, but this amendment, as the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, has said, gives enormous powers to the Secretary of State to decide the shape of how AI-generated services are controlled in this country. The Minister knows there is concern across the House about exposing this central part of the new tech economy to what are effectively unfettered ministerial powers. Very few noble Lords want to support a skeleton amendment like this.

Government Amendment 429B gives the Secretary of State the right to amend, which is defined later as including the right to

“repeal and apply (with or without modifications)”.

This applies to all of Part 3 of the Online Safety Act illegal content duties in relation to AI services. Parliament will not even have an option to amend regulations on this issue. Proposed new subsection (1) in this amendment seems like a big deal to me, and the noble Lord should be very concerned. The intention seems to be that the basis of the existing regime in Part 3 will be used, but we do not know how the Secretary of State will decide to adapt that regime to fit the particularities of AI services that generate illegal content. As the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, pointed out, that goes a long way beyond AI services designed to mimic humans and human conversations, which is what chatbots are. If a subsequently elected Government are in thrall of the tech companies, how might they abuse this power?

During the passage of the Online Safety Act, noble Lords spent time and energy defining both a “search service” and a “user-to-user service”, and their responsibility for both designing out and mitigating illegal harms. It seems extraordinary not to have the details of the new services on the face of the legislation. The definition of “AI” in new subsection (17) is oddly uninformative. It simply says:

“‘AI’ is short for artificial intelligence”.

I think we all know that. That does not give us much of a clue about which technology it covers. By contrast, I draw your Lordships’ attention to Article 3(1) of the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act, which sets out a carefully thought through definition of an AI system:

“‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that … infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions … or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments”.


The unclear nature of the AI definition in the amendment is compounded by new subsection (10), which allows for the definition of the provision to be changed and expanded. Once again, Parliament will not be able to amend any regulations derived from this power.

The biggest concern about the amendment is that, although it covers illegal content, it does not cover content that is harmful to children. As a result, I completely support my noble friend Lady Kidron’s Amendment 422D, and its consequential amendments, which would assuage many of my concerns about the scope and power given to Ministers at the expense of Parliament. I also urge noble Lords to vote against government Amendment 429B when it comes up later in the evening.

I also say to the Minister that regulating the wide definition of “AI” covered in Amendment 429B is important. It needs to be brought back as part of wider artificial intelligence legislation. I hope that he can reassure noble Lords that we will hear more about this in the King’s Speech.

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, I support all the amendments in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron. I will speak to Amendment 433. Worryingly, children are increasingly turning to AI chatbots for all facets of their everyday lives. For many, gone are the days of independent, creative or critical thinking. While chatbots can help children to explore and better understand their world, there are far too many shocking cases of children receiving harmful information and becoming emotionally dependent on these platforms.

As it stands, AI chatbots risk becoming the latest example of an online product that has been rolled out without the right safety guardrails in place, and children are bearing the brunt. It is as if their well-being and mental health are not important. I can hear the AI developers thinking among themselves: “Who cares? It’s only children”. Well, we should care. Childline is hearing more and more from children who are being harmed on these platforms, with cases of false mental health diagnoses, information on how to restrict diets, and the formation of emotional relationships between children and chatbots. In increasingly concerning cases, children who have experienced abuse are told by chatbots that what they experienced was not abuse. These platforms cannot be allowed to give children harmful and misleading safeguarding advice that could prevent them speaking to trusted adults or organisations such as Childline.

The Government’s action to expand the scope of the Online Safety Act to cover illegal content created by chatbots is most welcome, and I thank them for it. However, they cannot stop there. The harmful content that chatbots can generate must be included too. This must cover the harmful content duties in the Online Safety Act, such as preventing the encouragement of self-harm or suicide, and all harms that are unique to AI chatbots. It means preventing chatbots misleading or manipulating children or mimicking human relationships.

The amendment from the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, would make it a criminal offence to develop or supply an AI chatbot that harmed children. It is as simple as that. Providers must be legally required to risk-assess their services and put effective safeguards in place. Morally, this is the right thing to do. I ask the Minister: if the Government decide that they do not wish to support this amendment, please can they set out today how they will deliver measures that comprehensively protect children from all the risks that these services pose? As I keep saying, and will say one more time, childhood lasts a lifetime. If we truly care, we need to ensure that children are protected from every single type of harm. I look forward to the Minister’s response.

Crime and Policing Bill

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

Committee stage
Tuesday 27th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, I fully support these amendments and congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, on her fight to highlight these issues over many years and on her opening remarks. I also pay respect to the bereaved parents who have been campaigning tirelessly and look to us to achieve change.

It is common sense for coroners and law enforcement agencies to have access to the social media accounts of deceased children who are believed to have died as a result of social media activity. If it was your child or grandchild, would you not want that? This action needs to take place automatically before accounts are deleted. Accounts should be preserved, and it should be a criminal offence to delete or edit them before they are reviewed by investigators. Like so many grieving parents across the country, I strongly believe that social media companies should not be allowed to withhold or destroy often crucial evidence that could be vital to investigations and lead to criminal convictions.

After hearing on “BBC Breakfast” news this morning some of the heartbreaking stories from bereaved parents who are campaigning on this issue and urging the Government to take more robust action, I was convinced that tragic cases such as these clearly highlight the need for social media companies to be compelled to protect our children and safeguard them from harm. This is yet another plea before more harm is done because, right at this very moment, there is a child viewing harmful content that could lead to tragedy, so I hope the Government are listening—and is Ofcom listening? I want them to listen to these bereaved parents and take further action. I urge the Government to accept these much-needed amendments and act now.

[Baroness Shawcross-Wolfson (Con)]

My Lords, I cannot match the eloquence of some of the previous speakers, but I want to add my support for this group of amendments. We have heard the policy arguments for these proposals and, as a policymaker, I think they are overwhelming, but I add my support as a parent as well as a legislator.

Those of us with children and teenagers know full well how much of a child’s life nowadays is conducted on a screen behind a password. Friendships, pressures and influences are impossible to get at without access to that digital record. I pay tribute to the bereaved parents who have campaigned with such courage and dignity; they have turned unimaginable grief into a determination to protect others, and the whole House will honour what they are doing today.

I very much hope that the Government accept these amendments and, if not, I know that the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, will be true to her word and continue to bring them back on Report.

Crime and Policing Bill

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

2nd reading
Thursday 16th October 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, this Bill has the potential to transform how we protect children from the devastating crime of child sexual abuse. I welcome mandatory reporting. It will be a historic step, made possible thanks to the survivors who bravely shared their testimony with the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse. Too many children have been failed because adults in positions of trust and institutions that employed them protected themselves over children who needed them. But I fear that mandatory reporting will not be enough to create the culture of safeguarding this country so desperately needs.

All those who work with children—teachers, healthcare professionals and social workers—have a responsibility to keep children safe from harm, but they must feel confident and have the skills to do so. In 2020, the national review into child sexual abuse within the family environment highlighted that many practitioners lacked the knowledge, skill and confidence to talk about sexual abuse with children. That is why Barnardo’s, in which I declare an interest as vice-president, and many other children’s charities are calling for the introduction of clear guidance and training to accompany this essential new duty. Mandated reporters must be confident in their responsibilities and clear on what they should do if they suspect abuse, so training will support professionals to identify and act on the signs and symptoms of abuse, as well as to respond effectively in cases where children do disclose. Otherwise, we risk more children falling through the cracks and abuse going unrecognised.

There must also be accountability for both professional and civil mandated reporters who fail to report, as well as criminal convictions for any individual or institution that deliberately conceals abuse. The Centre of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse, which was hosted by Barnardo’s, has highlighted how such cover-ups have served only to increase a survivor’s sense of betrayal. Never again should institutions be allowed to put their reputation ahead of the safety of the child. They must be held accountable for failures to protect children, whether due to concealment, poor safeguarding or a lack of proper recruitment and training. This duty must be backed by a strong inspection regime so that children are never again left unprotected by systemic failure.

Protecting children is now more vital than ever, both offline and online. This means ensuring that the messages and images that shape young people’s understanding of relationships and content are not harmful. The BBFC found that one in three users of pornography had seen violent and abusive content online on numerous occasions. A poll by the Children’s Commissioner found that 44% of young people had viewed material online which portrayed sexual violence as normal. Content involving strangulation, incest and, worryingly, adults dressed as children, as well as content involving trafficking and torture, is rightly illegal offline, yet these images and videos are widely accessible online. This inconsistency is harmful, especially to children, and many find themselves victims.

In 2023, during the passage of the Online Safety Bill, I raised the extremely concerning issue that the laws on pornography are regulated differently offline from what is permitted online. The independent review by the noble Baroness, Lady Bertin, Creating a Safer World - the Challenge of Regulating Online Pornography, which I strongly support, is now also calling for online pornography to be regulated in line with offline pornography. If we do not act, we risk legitimising a culture where children continue to be sexualised and young people grow up with a distorted understanding of healthy relationships. No child should grow up in a world where abuse is normalised or their safety is undermined for profit, so let us ensure that every child’s lifetime is free from abuse, fear and silence, because childhood lasts a lifetime.

Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

Monday 20th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I say to my noble friend that my right honourable friend the Prime Minister takes a keen interest in the progress of these reports, and he will monitor and hold to account Ministers in government on that delivery. But the very fact that I am standing here today, and that my right honourable friend the Home Secretary was standing in the House of Commons, shows that we are responding on behalf of the Government to the IICSA response. That is where the lead and responsibility lie: with the Home Office. But we do not have the direct implementation of a number of recommendations, which require the engagement of the Department for Education, the Department of Health and Social Care, and other departments. We have set out the timetable to meet those 17 other recommendations; we have accepted the four, and we are already implementing some. Very shortly, other legislation will be published by the Home Office that will give effect to the recommendations we have accepted. It is our job to see that through and to do so, I hope—putting out the hand of friendship—with the support of the Opposition Front Bench.

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, I congratulate the Government on taking this robust approach in order to make a real difference and change for our children’s lives—the victims will carry that pain through childhood and beyond. The introduction of any duty to report child sexual abuse and exploitation must be accompanied by funding for services and training to support practitioners working with children across the country. Essential services like the NSPCC Childline and the Shore service play a vital role in supporting children who have suffered child sexual abuse and exploitation. How will the Government ensure that these services will be able to continue their valuable work?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful for the noble Baroness’s support for mandatory reporting. She participated in the debate on Friday and will know that I said from this Dispatch Box that this is an urgent issue for this Government. We will bring forward proposals on mandatory reporting in very short order. She raises the issue of funding. Any implementation of any recommendations requires a consistent government approach and a review of how we are funding those approaches to those issues. I cannot give her a detailed answer now, but, as part of the review on what we do with the 17 other recommendations, we will put meat on those bones so that she and others in this House can see what resources the Government are putting into this area.

The noble Baroness raises the issue of the very important support of the voluntary agencies. It is important that, politically—I mean that in a non-party-political way—we give support to Barnardo’s, the NSPCC and other organisations, which are doing great work in both highlighting this terrible abuse and very much supporting development work on the ground. This is helping the Government’s case to reduce the amount of child abuse as a whole. So I cannot give that answer now, but I will return to this in due course.

Regulated and Other Activities (Mandatory Reporting of Child Sexual Abuse) Bill [HL]

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 17th January 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, I support the Bill and the noble Baroness, Lady Grey-Thompson, on this important issue. I declare an interest as vice-president of Barnardo’s, which has been supporting victims and survivors of child sexual abuse and exploitation across the UK for more than 25 years and now hosts the independent Centre of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse. With the support of Barnardo’s, I have long campaigned for more services and greater capacity in the workforce to support victims and survivors of child sexual abuse. From the data we have, experts believe that at least 500,000 children under 18 are sexually abused in England and Wales every year, but the real total is likely to be much higher.

The Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse set out wide-ranging recommendations which must be implemented as a matter of urgency. Survivors must be listened to and services must be adequately funded. Action is long overdue. A duty to report child sexual abuse was a cornerstone recommendation of the independent inquiry led by Professor Alexis Jay. Adults working directly with children have a special responsibility to act when they are concerned about their safety. They must be clear about their responsibilities, and confident and supported to deliver them. In addition, there must be sanctions for concealing or covering up the sexual abuse of children.

The Home Secretary has now committed publicly to introduce this duty in law, along with a new victims’ and survivors’ panel, which I support wholeheartedly. However, victims and survivors have been waiting a long time for action since the review and they must not be left to wait any longer. We need to make sure that children can access specialist, confidential services, where they can build relationships with trusted adults. After experiencing the terrible trauma of sexual abuse, many children need time and space to reach a point where they can share their experiences in full, in a way that means action can be taken to keep them safe and, importantly, to bring abusers to justice. We must make sure that professionals can still take the time, when needed, to build these relationships ahead of reporting to others. If the law gets this wrong, it risks actively harming efforts to reduce sexual abuse—the exact opposite of what this Bill is hoping to achieve.

Without clear protections, essential services such as NSPCC Childline, and the Shore service operated by the Lucy Faithfull Foundation, will not be able to continue operating. We must ensure that these services can continue their valuable work. The introduction of any duty to report must be accompanied by funding for services and training to support practitioners, including volunteers, working with children. Mandated reporters must have the knowledge to identify and respond to concerns and to support children through the process. That requires high-quality resources and investment, not only from organisations but from government, to ensure that those working with children can access training and develop their skills and understanding.

Being a victim of abuse has a devastating effect on children that often stays with them long into adulthood. As I always say, childhood lasts a lifetime. I urge the Government to support this Bill for the sake of all the children who have been or are being sexually abused today.

Windrush Compensation Scheme

Baroness Benjamin Excerpts

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

Asked by

[Baroness Benjamin]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what progress has been made with the Windrush Compensation Scheme in settling unpaid claims.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

As of the end of October 2024, the amount paid to individuals was over £99 million over 2,826 claims. Over 96% of the 9,322 claims received have now received a final decision—roughly 8,500—or are less than six months old, as just over 500 are. On 8 July 2024 a new single named caseworker process was implemented. This change has streamlined the process, improved consistency, increased transparency and removed duplication that led to avoidable delay.

[Baroness Benjamin (LD)]

My Lords, the current Windrush compensation scheme is still too slow, too difficult to access and unfair. At least 53 victims of the scandal, which I prefer to call the Home Office scandal, have died while waiting for their claims to be processed. The impact on those affected has been enormous and traumatic, with long-term consequences for their mental and physical health and financial security. The burden of proof for claimants needs to be reduced. A report by Justice found that providing funding for legal aid would result in savings for the Home Office and reduce caseworker time. Applying to the Home Office for compensation retraumatises applicants; therefore, legal representation creates a buffer as the applicants would not have to deal directly with the Home Office. Has a cost-benefit analysis been carried out on the provision of legal aid for Windrush compensation scheme applicants and, if not, why not?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I pay tribute to the noble Baroness for the work that she has done in raising this consistently, before I came to this House and beyond. The type of campaigning she has undertaken is one of the reasons why the Labour Government put a pledge in their manifesto to both introduce the Windrush commissioner and put some energy into the system, for the very reasons the noble Baroness has mentioned.

We have put in £1.5 million to support advocacy groups. The noble Baroness mentioned legal aid, and I know she is meeting Minister Malhotra in early January; I hope the matter can be discussed then. I want to reassure her and the House that there is real energy to make sure that Windrush victims get compensation early and speedily, for the very reasons that she has mentioned, and I will take that commitment back to the Home Office today.