Asked by: Clive Lewis (Labour - Norwich South)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the potential implications for her policies of the findings of the report by the National Physical Laboratory, published on 4 December 2025, on the use of facial recognition technologies by the police.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Government has already taken action to address the findings of the National Physical Laboratory’s report on the algorithm used for retrospective facial recognition within the Police National Database.
The Home Office commissioned the report as the provider of the system, to enable police forces as the users of the system to assure themselves that they were meeting their Public Sector Equality Duty, specifically with respect to bias mitigation. The National Police Chiefs Council have led on this for policing by reviewing training and guidance. The Home Office has also commissioned His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to ensure these mitigations are consistent and robust.
Furthermore, a replacement system with a new algorithm has been procured and independently tested. This testing has been published and shows that the system can be used with no statistically significant bias. It is due to be operationally tested early next year and will be subject to further evaluation.
On 4 December 2025, we also started a public consultation that asks for views on a new legal framework for law enforcement use of facial recognition and other biometric technologies. The consultation includes questions on oversight arrangements and proposes creating a new regulatory and oversight body. We envisage this body would directly address issues such as potential bias in algorithms, potentially through powers, subject to legislation, to provide assurance that law enforcement use of biometric technologies is legal, responsible, and necessary.
Given the importance of this issue, we have also asked the HMICFRS, alongside the Forensic Science Regulator, to review law enforcement’s use of facial recognition. They will assess the effectiveness of the mitigations, which the National Police Chiefs Council supports.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the oral answer of 26 November 2025, Official Report, House of Lords, Column 1331, on West Midlands Police: Maccabi Tel Aviv Fans, whether she has asked the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police if (a) West Midlands Police and (b) Safety Advisory Group were subject to partisan campaigning calling for the banning of Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv Europa League game of 6 November 2025.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
I wrote to the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police on 24 November to request an urgent update clarifying the provenance of the intelligence gathered by his force and his confidence in this. The Chief Constable replied on 28 November. I again wrote on 10 December, in the interests of transparency, seeking clarification of the engagement the West Midlands Police undertook with Jewish community stakeholders to inform its community impact assessment.
The Home Office routinely engages with international partners as part of its departmental interests in policing, border security and immigration. Officials have met with Dutch counterparts in recent weeks on these matters, including as part of efforts to ensure full transparency around the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from attending the fixture against Aston Villa in November.
The gathering and assessment of police intelligence is a matter for West Midlands Police, and the United Kingdom Football Policing Unit who undertake the role of National Football Information Point.
To ensure full independent scrutiny, the Home Secretary has commissioned His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to inspect how police forces in England and Wales provide risk assessment advice to local Safety Advisory Groups and other bodies responsible for licensing high-profile public events. HMICFRS has been asked to provide an initial response on the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv match by 31 December.
Additionally, the Home Affairs Select Committee held an evidence session on 1 December to examine the decision-making process and intelligence assessments. The government awaits the Committee’s findings. Correspondence between the Committee and relevant parties is routinely published on the Committee’s official website.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the oral answer of 26 November 2025, Official Report, House of Lords, Column 1331, on West Midlands Police: Maccabi Tel Aviv Fans, whether she has asked the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police to publicly disclose the list of (a) individuals and (b) organisations which provided information to that police force in relation to the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv Europa League game of 6 November 2025.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
I wrote to the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police on 24 November to request an urgent update clarifying the provenance of the intelligence gathered by his force and his confidence in this. The Chief Constable replied on 28 November. I again wrote on 10 December, in the interests of transparency, seeking clarification of the engagement the West Midlands Police undertook with Jewish community stakeholders to inform its community impact assessment.
The Home Office routinely engages with international partners as part of its departmental interests in policing, border security and immigration. Officials have met with Dutch counterparts in recent weeks on these matters, including as part of efforts to ensure full transparency around the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from attending the fixture against Aston Villa in November.
The gathering and assessment of police intelligence is a matter for West Midlands Police, and the United Kingdom Football Policing Unit who undertake the role of National Football Information Point.
To ensure full independent scrutiny, the Home Secretary has commissioned His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to inspect how police forces in England and Wales provide risk assessment advice to local Safety Advisory Groups and other bodies responsible for licensing high-profile public events. HMICFRS has been asked to provide an initial response on the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv match by 31 December.
Additionally, the Home Affairs Select Committee held an evidence session on 1 December to examine the decision-making process and intelligence assessments. The government awaits the Committee’s findings. Correspondence between the Committee and relevant parties is routinely published on the Committee’s official website.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to the oral answer of 26 November 2025, Official Report, House of Lords, Column 1331, on West Midlands Police: Maccabi Tel Aviv Fans, whether she has asked the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police if that police force received intelligence input from other police forces in England in relation to the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv Europa League game of 6 November 2025.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
I wrote to the Chief Constable of West Midlands Police on 24 November to request an urgent update clarifying the provenance of the intelligence gathered by his force and his confidence in this. The Chief Constable replied on 28 November. I again wrote on 10 December, in the interests of transparency, seeking clarification of the engagement the West Midlands Police undertook with Jewish community stakeholders to inform its community impact assessment.
The Home Office routinely engages with international partners as part of its departmental interests in policing, border security and immigration. Officials have met with Dutch counterparts in recent weeks on these matters, including as part of efforts to ensure full transparency around the decision to ban Maccabi Tel Aviv fans from attending the fixture against Aston Villa in November.
The gathering and assessment of police intelligence is a matter for West Midlands Police, and the United Kingdom Football Policing Unit who undertake the role of National Football Information Point.
To ensure full independent scrutiny, the Home Secretary has commissioned His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) to inspect how police forces in England and Wales provide risk assessment advice to local Safety Advisory Groups and other bodies responsible for licensing high-profile public events. HMICFRS has been asked to provide an initial response on the Aston Villa v Maccabi Tel Aviv match by 31 December.
Additionally, the Home Affairs Select Committee held an evidence session on 1 December to examine the decision-making process and intelligence assessments. The government awaits the Committee’s findings. Correspondence between the Committee and relevant parties is routinely published on the Committee’s official website.
Asked by: Lord Harper (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many hotels were housing asylum seekers in (1) July 2023, (2) July 2024, and (3) either July 2025 or the most recent month for which data is available.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
This Government recognises that hotels are not a sustainable solution for accommodating asylum seekers and remains committed to ending their use, already reducing the number in operation. We do not provide a running commentary on hotel numbers, our objective is to close all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament, reducing costs to the taxpayer and restoring control to local communities.
Asked by: Lord German (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, with reference to the Home Office policy paper, Restoring Order and Control: A statement on the government’s asylum and returns policy, published on 17 November, whether they intend to detain in immigration detention centres children who were once accepted as refugees but subsequently not so, following a 30-month review of their status.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Pathways for unaccompanied children, families with children, and other vulnerable asylum seekers will be reviewed with full consideration of our EQIA and Section 55 duties to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in the UK.
As now, children will not be detained in Immigration Removal Centres.
Asked by: Lord Evans of Rainow (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what measures are currently in place to address abuse and theft against (1) retail, (2) hospitality, and (3) leisure businesses.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through our Crime and Policing Bill, this Government has introduced a new specific standalone offence of assaulting a retail worker to help tackle the epidemic of shop theft and violence towards shop workers that we have seen in recent years and protect the hardworking and dedicated staff that work in stores.
This definition of a retail worker captures someone working in or about retail premises for or on behalf of the owner or occupier of the retail premises.
Our definition is intentionally narrow and does not include hospitality staff, given the vital need to provide legal clarity and ensure there is no ambiguity for courts in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker and impacted during their job. Any ambiguity in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker, will likely lead the courts to take the case forward as common assault meaning specific recording attributed to a retail worker would not occur.
Those workers whose roles are not included within the definition are already covered under other legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which also covers more serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
Public facing workers, including those in the transport and hospitality sectors, are also covered under legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which covers serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
We introduced a statutory aggravating factor for assault against any public facing worker via section 156 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. The aggravating factor applies in cases of assault where an offence is committed against those providing a public service, performing a public duty or providing a service to the public. This ensures the courts treat the public-facing nature of a victim’s role as an aggravating factor when considering the sentence for an offence.
Asked by: Lord Evans of Rainow (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the Crime and Policing Bill will protect workers in fast food and takeaway restaurants in the same way as those working in the retail sector.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through our Crime and Policing Bill, this Government has introduced a new specific standalone offence of assaulting a retail worker to help tackle the epidemic of shop theft and violence towards shop workers that we have seen in recent years and protect the hardworking and dedicated staff that work in stores.
This definition of a retail worker captures someone working in or about retail premises for or on behalf of the owner or occupier of the retail premises.
Our definition is intentionally narrow and does not include hospitality staff, given the vital need to provide legal clarity and ensure there is no ambiguity for courts in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker and impacted during their job. Any ambiguity in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker, will likely lead the courts to take the case forward as common assault meaning specific recording attributed to a retail worker would not occur.
Those workers whose roles are not included within the definition are already covered under other legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which also covers more serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
Public facing workers, including those in the transport and hospitality sectors, are also covered under legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which covers serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
We introduced a statutory aggravating factor for assault against any public facing worker via section 156 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. The aggravating factor applies in cases of assault where an offence is committed against those providing a public service, performing a public duty or providing a service to the public. This ensures the courts treat the public-facing nature of a victim’s role as an aggravating factor when considering the sentence for an offence.
Asked by: Lord Evans of Rainow (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the definition of 'retail premises' in clause 37(2) of the Crime and Policing Bill extends to hospitality premises that also undertake retail activities.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
Through our Crime and Policing Bill, this Government has introduced a new specific standalone offence of assaulting a retail worker to help tackle the epidemic of shop theft and violence towards shop workers that we have seen in recent years and protect the hardworking and dedicated staff that work in stores.
This definition of a retail worker captures someone working in or about retail premises for or on behalf of the owner or occupier of the retail premises.
Our definition is intentionally narrow and does not include hospitality staff, given the vital need to provide legal clarity and ensure there is no ambiguity for courts in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker and impacted during their job. Any ambiguity in identifying whether an individual is a retail worker, will likely lead the courts to take the case forward as common assault meaning specific recording attributed to a retail worker would not occur.
Those workers whose roles are not included within the definition are already covered under other legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which also covers more serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
Public facing workers, including those in the transport and hospitality sectors, are also covered under legislation such as the Offences against the Person Act 1861, which covers serious violence, such as actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm.
We introduced a statutory aggravating factor for assault against any public facing worker via section 156 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. The aggravating factor applies in cases of assault where an offence is committed against those providing a public service, performing a public duty or providing a service to the public. This ensures the courts treat the public-facing nature of a victim’s role as an aggravating factor when considering the sentence for an offence.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many civil servants are assigned to locating absconded foreign national offenders and irregular migrants; and whether performance targets are in place for reducing the size of the absconder pool.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
The cost of collating information on absconders will depend on a range of variable factors, including the level of detail required and where the information is held. Extracting information from multiple databases and datasets may also involve manual scrutiny of individual records. Given these variables, any general estimate would be unreliable with assessments instead being made in response to individual requests and the specific circumstances.
The Home Office has a range of tools to trace those who abscond, the number of staff involved in tracing activity varies across Immigration Enforcement depending on operational need, with c.65 staff currently dedicated to tracing activities, aswell as resources elsewhere within the Migration and Borders System, who are responsible for recording information when individuals are found or come back into contact. The number of absconders recorded on Home Office systems can fluctuate and there are no formal targets linked to a reduction in the number. The Home Office works closely with the police, other government agencies, commercial companies and international partners to trace absconders and bring them back into contact. Where new contact details are found we will consider the most appropriate intervention for the person including arrest and detention.