Antisemitic Attacks

Debate between Gareth Snell and Dan Jarvis

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the hon. Member for raising those points. He is absolutely right that this abhorrent targeting has no place in our society—not now, not ever. Although I completely accept his characterisation of many British Jews currently feeling fearful, it is important to make the point—as I saw myself this morning—that the resilience and enduring decency of our Jewish communities, looking out for each other and working with a range of other community groups, are incredibly inspiring and impressive to see. We should not lose sight of that; that is a real light in a moment of darkness. To answer his question directly, of course I will be happy to meet him and the families.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

To follow the point of the hon. Member for Mid Buckinghamshire (Greg Smith), too many aspects of antisemitism are being normalised in this country. That does not start with attacks on places of worship or on clearly Jewish buildings; it starts with the words and actions of individuals who seek to demonise Jewish people in day-to-day language. It starts with the deputy leader of the Green party publishing a list of British Jews and calling them part of the Israeli lobby, or putting out a list of British-Jewish donors and saying they are part of the Israeli lobby. It starts with the soft approach of demonising a small group of people because of their faith, as my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (David Taylor) said. What action is being taken across Government, not to deal with the instances after the event, but to tackle the root cause—that scourge of virulent racism—that is being normalised by too many people who ought to know better?

[Dan Jarvis]

I hope that across the House there is a shared endeavour and an absolute determination to ensure that this does not become the new normal that we have to endure. None of us wants that to be the case. My hon. Friend is right to raise the importance of tackling the root causes, and hopefully he will have heard my earlier answers, but he is also right to make the point that this work needs to be properly co-ordinated across Government. Although there is an important role for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in leading this work, it needs a response from the whole system and the whole of Government. I assure him that through the Home Office and the Cabinet Office, and with other supporting Departments, we make sure that that is the case.

Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill

Debate between Gareth Snell and Dan Jarvis

2nd reading
Monday 30th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Security (Dan Jarvis)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance, as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish, they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld. For a nation to thrive, its leaders must be unrelenting in the pursuit of these critical aims. That is why the Prime Minister has made national security a foundation of the plan for change, and it is why we work around the clock with our partners in policing and the security services to keep the United Kingdom and its people safe.

In the face of a complex and evolving threat picture, it is essential that we keep the powers, tools and measures available to us under constant review. Where steps are needed to maintain the safety and security of our country, this Government will not hesitate to act. It is with that intention that we have brought forward this Bill, which, although narrow in its scope and intent, is vital to our ongoing efforts to protect the United Kingdom.

Before I come to the detail of the Bill, I will provide a little bit of background. The British Nationality Act 1981 provides for the removal of an individual’s British citizenship. This is also known as a deprivation of citizenship. Deprivation is an important and effective tool to maintain public safety and preserve national security. It is used in two different situations: where citizenship has been obtained by fraud, or where deprivation is conducive to the public good, which means that it is in the public interest to deprive a person of British citizenship because of their conduct and/or the threat that they pose to the United Kingdom.

[Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I accept the Minister’s point that this is a very narrow Bill, but is he able to tell the House how many individuals who currently have an appeal that has not yet been heard, and to whom this Bill will ultimately apply, have been deprived of their citizenship?

[Dan Jarvis]

I am happy to do that. If my hon. Friend bears with me for just a couple of moments, I will provide him with the information that he has requested.

In the latter category especially—where deprivation is conducive to the public good—deprivation is used against some of the most dangerous individuals, including terrorists, extremists, and serious and organised criminals. Someone in the UK who has been deprived of their British citizenship no longer has any immigration status, steps may be taken to remove them from the UK, and they may be held in an immigration detention in the interim. If they are overseas, they cannot re-enter the UK using a British passport. In both circumstances, this is clearly an effective way to disrupt the threat posed by dangerous individuals.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dan Jarvis]

I am going to make a little bit of progress, if I may. I will give way in a moment, but I want to address the point that has been raised.

There are very good reasons why the Government may wish to stop citizenship being regained until all appeals are determined, withdrawn or abandoned. These include to prevent someone who is outside the UK and who poses a risk to our national security from returning when a further appeal may be upheld pending the Home Secretary’s decision, or to prevent a person from renouncing their other nationality and putting themselves in a position where, if further appeals are successful, a further deprivation order would not be possible as it would unlawfully render them stateless.

[Gareth Snell]

I thank the Minister for that explanation, but hypothetically there exists a circumstance in which the Home Secretary could deprive an individual of their citizenship, that individual could go for an appeal and have it reinstated, and this law would prevent them from retaining that citizenship and the Department could simply choose not to appeal further. How does the Department ensure that the individual is then allowed to access future appeals to try to regularise their citizenship status?

[Dan Jarvis]

For reasons that I do not understand, my hon. Friend is progressing a hypothetical scenario; I do not know whether it is based on a particular case that he has in mind. I have not personally dealt with such a set of circumstances, but I am happy to look at the matter he has raised.