Asked by: Hannah Spencer (Green Party - Gorton and Denton)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what safeguarding processes are in place to (a) identify and (b) protect (i) unaccompanied and (ii) age-disputed children under the one in and one out policy.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
Unaccompanied children are not subject to the agreement between the United Kingdom and France on the prevention of dangerous journeys, also known as the one-in, one-out policy.
Upon arrival, where an individual claims to be a child without any credible and clear documentary evidence of age, and where there is reason to doubt their claimed age, immigration officers are required to make an initial age decision to determine whether the individual should be treated as a child or an adult. This is an important first step to prevent individuals who are clearly an adult or child from being subjected unnecessarily to a more substantive age assessment and ensure individuals are routed to the correct adult or child process.
The ‘Assessing Age’ guidance details the Home Office’s age assessment policy for immigration purposes. It provides that immigration officers may only treat an individual as an adult where they have no credible and clear documentary evidence proving their age, and two members of Home Office staff independently assess that their physical appearance and demeanour very strongly suggest that the individual is ‘significantly over 18’.
This is a deliberately high threshold where the principle of the benefit of the doubt is key and if that threshold is not met, but there remains doubt about the individual’s age, they will be treated as a child and transferred to a local authority for further consideration of their age. This often involves a further, more comprehensive ‘Merton-compliant’ age assessment. This approach to initial decisions on age has been considered by the Supreme Court in BF (Eritrea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 38 and held to be lawful.
Where individuals are assessed to be significantly over 18, they are able to approach local authorities for further age assessment if they disagree with the Home Office’s decision. Individuals also have access to legal representation and can make legal challenges to age assessments. Individuals are not removed to France where their age is in dispute.
Asked by: Hannah Spencer (Green Party - Gorton and Denton)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will suspend all new generic service licences for animal experiments whilst conducting a review of all currently held generic licenses to determine (a) the type and purpose of animal experiments conducted, (b) whether appropriate harm-benefit analysis is being undertaken and (c) what steps are taken to follow the 3Rs (replacing, reducing or refining the use of animals) wherever possible under those generic licences.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government will continue to grant service licences in accordance with the rigorous requirements of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA).
Service licences support regulatory testing required to meet legal and international standards for the authorisation of medicines and the appropriate regulatory routes for other products, materials and devices. These studies provide essential non-clinical safety data, including on toxicity, how substances are processed in the body, and their effects on organs, to support safe progression to first-in-human trials.
All project licence applications, including generic service licences, are subject to a rigorous harm–benefit analysis as required under ASPA. Where licences cover a class of studies rather than named substances, the assessment focuses on the scientific objectives and regulatory safety questions being addressed, and the extent to which the work is likely to deliver benefits, such as supporting the safe development and use of medicines.
The 3Rs, replacement, reduction and refinement, are a legal requirement under ASPA and must be fully applied in every project. Applicants must demonstrate consideration of the 3Rs before submission, and all applications are assessed by Home Office Inspectors to ensure that no viable non-animal alternatives exist, that animal numbers are minimised, and that methods are refined to reduce suffering. This assessment is supported by continuous scrutiny after a licence is granted. ASRU conducts announced and unannounced audits, reviewing records and practices to ensure the 3Rs continue to be applied and that licence conditions remain appropriate.
In November 2025, the Government published its strategy, “Replacing animals in science: a strategy to support the development, validation and uptake of alternative methods” which can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/replacing-animals-in-science-strategy/replacing-animals-in-science-a-strategy-to-support-the-development-validation-and-uptake-of-alternative-methods
Asked by: Hannah Spencer (Green Party - Gorton and Denton)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to WPQ UIN 121674, tabled on 17 March 2026 on Asylum: Artificial Intelligence if people will be informed if their asylum case is being assessed with the input of AI under the ACS and APS schemes.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
Both ACS and APS underwent user acceptance testing and evaluation was conducted following pilots of both tools. All caseworkers were given comprehensive training on the use of APS before it was operationalised (to note ACS is not yet fully operational). A specific inbox was set up for Decision Makers to feed back any issues found with the tool.
All questions asked of the tool, have and will be logged, and are auditable. Subject Matter Expert (SME) testing continues after operationalisation, in conjunction with the CPIT (Country Policy & Information Team), for APS. ACS has not yet been operationalised, but our Analysis and Insight team plan to conduct further follow up evaluations in due course.
Existing quality control processes are followed alongside data capture, development and two-way feedback mechanisms.
No process and/or tooling details are currently released to asylum claimants - this has not changed with the incorporation of AI elements into case working.
Asked by: Hannah Spencer (Green Party - Gorton and Denton)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to WPQ UIN 121674, tabled on 17 March 2026 on Asylum: Artificial Intelligence what a)steps were taken at the design stage to assess b)mechanisms are in place to monitor the i) accuracy ii) political neutrality of the information used by ACS and APS tools.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
Both ACS and APS underwent user acceptance testing and evaluation was conducted following pilots of both tools. All caseworkers were given comprehensive training on the use of APS before it was operationalised (to note ACS is not yet fully operational). A specific inbox was set up for Decision Makers to feed back any issues found with the tool.
All questions asked of the tool, have and will be logged, and are auditable. Subject Matter Expert (SME) testing continues after operationalisation, in conjunction with the CPIT (Country Policy & Information Team), for APS. ACS has not yet been operationalised, but our Analysis and Insight team plan to conduct further follow up evaluations in due course.
Existing quality control processes are followed alongside data capture, development and two-way feedback mechanisms.
No process and/or tooling details are currently released to asylum claimants - this has not changed with the incorporation of AI elements into case working.