Asked by: Lord Mott (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what recent discussions they have had with the Charity Commission about reports of alleged links to Iran of (a) the Abrar Islamic Foundation, and (b) Dar Alhekma.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government takes very seriously any alleged links between a charity and extremism or terrorism and will respond robustly to evidence of wrongdoing.
While we cannot comment on individual cases, the promotion of extremist views or terrorism in charities is unacceptable. The Charity Commission is alive to the risks of state threats to the charity sector and works with other agencies to protect the sector from the risks of being exploited.
The Charity Commission has consistently been clear that it will respond robustly where there proves to have been wrongdoing and I am confident that it has the ability to do so effectively. They have a range of powers at their disposal including freezing bank accounts, directing trustees to take corrective action, or disqualifying trustees, and will do so as appropriate.
The Charity Commission has published guidance that explains in which circumstances a report about serious wrongdoing should be made, which details should be provided, and what it will do after receiving a report.
Ministers and officials regularly meet with the Charity Commission to discuss a range of issues relating to the regulation of charities.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment has she made of the potential implications for her policies of the availability of crossbows through online purchases.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government is actively considering the introduction of further controls around crossbows. This follows a call for evidence on strengthening controls on crossbows on public safety grounds, which ran from 14 February to 9 April 2024, and tested ideas for whether there should be some form of licensing regime that would provide further controls on the use, ownership and supply of crossbows including whether sellers should be licensed in some way. We will publish the Government’s response to the call for evidence shortly, which will include what action we intend to take.
Crossbows are age restricted items and it is an offence, under the Crossbows Act 1987, for anyone under the age of 18 to purchase a crossbow or parts of a crossbow. The Government is taking action to strengthen the law on age verification for the online sale and delivery of crossbows through measures currently in the Crime and Policing Bill.
Asked by: Lord Taylor of Warwick (Non-affiliated - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what consideration they are giving to exemptions to the proposed ban on ransomware payments for operators of critical national infrastructure.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Protecting the UK from cyber threats is a top priority for this Government. Ransomware measures are being considered as part of a wider all-of-Government approach to reduce cyber threats, alongside the Cyber Security and Resilience Bill by DSIT.
It is long-standing Government advice, and that of the National Cyber Security Centre, to not pay ransoms as there is no guarantee of a return to business-as-usual provision. .
We have consulted on this, and as published in the Government response to ransomware legislative proposals: reducing payments to cyber criminals and increasing incident reporting (accessible) - GOV.UK, there was split feedback regarding whether a targeted ban should have an exceptions(/exemptions) process. 43% of respondents agreed, 40% disagreed, 17% didn’t know. Qualitative responses cited national security and public safety as reasons for the need.
As with all feedback provided in the consultation response, the Government is considering the most appropriate and proportionate course of action and developing the policy in collaboration with industry and the relevant Government departments. No final decision has yet been made, and the Government is looking very carefully at all options.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to improve night time safety in bars and clubs.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government works closely with local authorities and industry to ensure venues licensed to sell alcohol, such as bars and clubs, operate safely. Under the Licensing Act 2003, which applies to England and Wales, premises must promote the four statutory licensing objectives - public safety, the prevention of crime and disorder, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm.
If a matter arises at a premises that undermines any of these objectives, the relevant licensing authority may review the licence and take appropriate action up to and including suspending or revoking the licence.
We also encourage licence holders to adopt recognised safeguarding initiatives which provide support for individuals who feel unsafe in the night-time economy.
Furthermore, from 1 December 2025 to 31 January 2026, we are running a Winter of Action to target night-time economy offences, retail crime and anti-social behaviour across England and Wales. Led by Police and Crime Commissioners and Deputy Mayors, local plans will be delivered in partnership with police forces and community safety organisations to address the issues that matter most in town centres.
Asked by: Wendy Morton (Conservative - Aldridge-Brownhills)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Written Statement entitled Consultation on a new legal framework for law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies, published on 4 December 2025, HCWS1129, what assessment she has made of the safeguards required to ensure that the use of facial recognition and similar biometric technologies by law enforcement remains proportionate to the seriousness of the harm being addressed; what steps she plans to take to ensure that the legal framework maintains public confidence in the protection of individual rights, privacy and data security; and whether she intends to publish an impact assessment on the potential implications for civil liberties as part of the consultation process.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring the use of facial recognition and similar biometric technologies by law enforcement remains proportionate to the seriousness of the harm being addressed. The consultation launched on 4 December seeks views on whether seriousness of harm should be a factor to decide how and when law enforcement organisations can acquire, retain, and use biometrics, facial recognition, and similar technology. The consultation also asks for views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing ‘seriousness’ of harm and for which purposes should law enforcement organisations be allowed to use these technologies.
We do not intend to publish an impact assessment specifically on the potential implications for civil liberties as part of the consultation process. However, alongside the consultation we have published an equalities impact assessment which makes clear the Government’s commitment to building public trust by highlighting the specific legal frameworks that will be put in place and the statutory bodies for oversight, which will apply to everyone in England and Wales.
We recognise that to maintain public confidence we must ensure individual rights, privacy and data security are protected. We believe that the use of biometric and inferential technology should always be demonstrably ‘necessary’ and ‘proportionate’ to the objective being sought. Furthermore, a clear and consistent justification for interference with people’s rights is required. Threshold setting and decision making needs to be attributed to, and shared appropriately between, Parliament, Ministers, independent oversight bodies, and law enforcement organisations. The consultation seeks views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing interference with privacy so as to ensure the legal framework reflects the views of the public.
When using facial recognition technology, police forces must comply with existing legislation including the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 2018, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as well as their own published policies. For live facial recognition, police forces must also follow the College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Live Facial Recognition.
Oversight of police practice regarding deployment of facial recognition and related technologies is currently provided by regulators and public bodies, including the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner, the Information Commissioner, HMICFRS, Equality and Human Rights Commission, and the Independent Office for Police Conduct. The courts system also plays a vital role in ensuring the law is upheld.
The Government recognises the importance of independent scrutiny to ensure operational consistency across forces under new framework. That is why the consultation explained the government’s proposal to create a single regulatory and oversight body to oversee law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies.
The Government envisage giving this body the necessary powers to provide assurance that law enforcement use of biometric technologies is legal, responsible, and necessary. These powers could include setting standards to assure scientific validity, issuing codes of practice and investigating instances where a technology has been misused, hacked or accessed without authorisation.
Asked by: Wendy Morton (Conservative - Aldridge-Brownhills)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the Written Statement entitled Consultation on a new legal framework for law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies, published on 4 December 2025, HCWS1129, what assessment her Department has made of the effectiveness of police practice in the deployment of facial recognition and other biometric technologies; and whether she plans to enhance oversight and independent scrutiny of that deployment.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government recognises the importance of ensuring the use of facial recognition and similar biometric technologies by law enforcement remains proportionate to the seriousness of the harm being addressed. The consultation launched on 4 December seeks views on whether seriousness of harm should be a factor to decide how and when law enforcement organisations can acquire, retain, and use biometrics, facial recognition, and similar technology. The consultation also asks for views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing ‘seriousness’ of harm and for which purposes should law enforcement organisations be allowed to use these technologies.
We do not intend to publish an impact assessment specifically on the potential implications for civil liberties as part of the consultation process. However, alongside the consultation we have published an equalities impact assessment which makes clear the Government’s commitment to building public trust by highlighting the specific legal frameworks that will be put in place and the statutory bodies for oversight, which will apply to everyone in England and Wales.
We recognise that to maintain public confidence we must ensure individual rights, privacy and data security are protected. We believe that the use of biometric and inferential technology should always be demonstrably ‘necessary’ and ‘proportionate’ to the objective being sought. Furthermore, a clear and consistent justification for interference with people’s rights is required. Threshold setting and decision making needs to be attributed to, and shared appropriately between, Parliament, Ministers, independent oversight bodies, and law enforcement organisations. The consultation seeks views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing interference with privacy so as to ensure the legal framework reflects the views of the public.
When using facial recognition technology, police forces must comply with existing legislation including the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 2018, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as well as their own published policies. For live facial recognition, police forces must also follow the College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Live Facial Recognition.
Oversight of police practice regarding deployment of facial recognition and related technologies is currently provided by regulators and public bodies, including the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner, the Information Commissioner, HMICFRS, Equality and Human Rights Commission, and the Independent Office for Police Conduct. The courts system also plays a vital role in ensuring the law is upheld.
The Government recognises the importance of independent scrutiny to ensure operational consistency across forces under new framework. That is why the consultation explained the government’s proposal to create a single regulatory and oversight body to oversee law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies.
The Government envisage giving this body the necessary powers to provide assurance that law enforcement use of biometric technologies is legal, responsible, and necessary. These powers could include setting standards to assure scientific validity, issuing codes of practice and investigating instances where a technology has been misused, hacked or accessed without authorisation.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many asylum claims (a) approved and (b) rejected since July 2024 involved face-to-face interviews.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
The information requested is not currently available from published statistics, and the relevant data could only be collated and verified for the purpose of answering this question at disproportionate cost.
Asked by: John Hayes (Conservative - South Holland and The Deepings)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many and what proportion of immigrants detained following their arrival in the UK by small boats have been searched for drugs in each of the past five years.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
I refer the Hon. Member to the answer given to questions 71052, 71053 and 71054 on 4th September.
Asked by: Andrew Snowden (Conservative - Fylde)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the prevalence of drug smuggling among illegal migrants who arrive in the UK via the Channel.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
I refer the Hon. Member to the answer given to questions 71052, 71053 and 71054 on 4th September.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the adequacy of Answers to Parliamentary written questions on absconded foreign national offenders and irregular migrants.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Secretary of State for the Home Department has no plans to commission an independent review into the Department’s handling, recording, and disclosure of absconder data. The Department already undertakes:
The Department remains committed to maintaining robust and transparent processes, ensuring compliance with all relevant standards and obligations. It is also dedicated to continuous improvement and will review and strengthen its procedures whenever necessary.
The Government attaches great importance to the effective and timely handling of Written Parliamentary Questions. Departmental performance on Written Parliamentary Questions is published at the end of each session by the Procedure Committee and is therefore publicly available.
All Parliamentary Questions are reviewed and cleared by Ministers prior to publication including those referring to absconders.