Defending Democracy Taskforce
Debate between Lord Hanson of Flint and Lord Wallace of Saltaire(1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
Mr Gill is in prison now because the counterterrorism police of the security services in the United Kingdom brought evidence together, sufficient for prosecution, which proved he was acting as a traitor to this country by promoting information on behalf of a foreign nation and that he had taken money to do that. That is not acceptable and should send a warning to all who would potentially undertake that type of activity in the future. We keep under constant review potential threats and misinformation. We will continue to take action through the Online Safety Act and the review that my honourable friend the Security Minister is currently undertaking. Foreign interference in our democratic process is not acceptable and Mr Gill’s jail sentence is evidence that we will take action.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire (LD)
My Lords, I understand why some of the investigations that the Defending Democracy Taskforce is undertaking have to be kept highly confidential, but if we are going to defend democracy effectively, the public and parliamentarians need to be well informed as to the nature of the threats. I understand that Sir Philip Rycroft’s review of foreign financial influence and interference in UK elections, due in March, is to be presented to the Security Minister. Before this House has the elections Bill, which we expect in the next few months, it would be helpful for us to be informed as fully as possible of what that report says. If much of it is not allowed to be published for the public, can parliamentarians at least have as full a briefing as possible?
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
It is important that any information that comes from Sir Philip Rycroft’s review or from the separate review from the Security Minister is analysed. There will always obviously be restrictions on the information we can put into the public domain, but I will take away what the noble Lord has requested and find a mechanism to ensure that, for the information we can put into the public domain, that is done.
Muslim Brotherhood
Debate between Lord Hanson of Flint and Lord Wallace of Saltaire(2 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
There is a range of offences on the statute book on which the security services and/or the police can take action in the event of potential terrorist or criminal activity. The purpose of proscription is to say that an individual cannot support an organisation, and that gives additional power to the state to protect citizens who are subject to potential terrorist or criminal activity. Proscription is defined very clearly by the Terrorism Act 2000, and therefore there are strict criteria where proscription can take place. But that proscription is done for a purpose: to secure an end to what could be perceived to be legitimate support for organisations that foster terrorism.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire (LD)
My Lords, I simply ask the Minister whether he feels that, under the current circumstances, we should be a little more cautious than usual about following the advice of President Trump on the designation of foreign groups as being either terrorists or in other ways outside the realm of law.
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
President Trump is responsible for the policy of the United States. The noble Lord will know that, before Christmas, the United States produced a document on its approach to foreign policy. We are an independent nation and we will look at any issues with the interests of the United Kingdom. In this case, going back to the original Question from the noble Lord, Lord Godson, the evidence President Trump has called for in relation to the Muslim Brotherhood has not yet been completed, so it would be very foolish of us to make a decision on that issue, which we keep under review at all times, without even seeing what the Americans have said. We will examine the issue, and we will always be an independent nation responsible for our own foreign policy.
Police: Records
Debate between Lord Hanson of Flint and Lord Wallace of Saltaire(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
The noble Lord makes a very important point. There is the idea of 43 police forces, going back to the noble Viscount’s initial point, but we should be trying to encourage co-operation on procurement, on personnel services and on a whole range of other issues where we can save resource and put it into front-line policing. Without trailing too much, the White Paper will examine how we improve that collaboration. When it is published, I hope the noble Lord will welcome it, contribute to it and, if need be, challenge it.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire (LD)
My Lords, peacekeeping needs to be local as well as national. If one centralises too much the way the police is organised, we will lose touch with people in communities. I also recall that the four Yorkshire forces have a number of collaborative operations about organised crime, terrorism and, as I remember, helicopters and animals. These are obvious things to collaborate on, but one should retain a sufficient link with local communities in order to make sure that policing makes sense to the people it serves.
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
Absolutely. The whole principle of policing is that it represents and is accountable to the local community. If I may say so to the noble Lord, it is still absolutely vital that we get best value out of the police resources that are put in. It is a valuable course of action to follow to find mechanisms to ensure that police forces can co-operate, where they want to, on getting a better deal for the taxpayer on some major procurement or on efficiencies generally. When the police White Paper is published relatively shortly, it will offer a number of pointers for where that co-operation can potentially be encouraged.
Defending Democracy Taskforce
Debate between Lord Hanson of Flint and Lord Wallace of Saltaire(1 year ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
The Government keep under review at all times the influence and threats from foreign powers. I will reflect on the particular point the noble Lord mentioned, but we are very clear that foreign influence on UK government policy, or the undermining of elections, is not acceptable.
Lord Wallace of Saltaire (LD)
My Lords, the Defending Democracy Taskforce has a relatively narrow focus on hostile states and covert action. What we have seen recently have been private actions, very often made openly, from within states we regarded as friendly, including misinformation, the weaponisation of social media and flows of funds, actual and promised, which are clearly foreign interference in British politics. Does that come within the Defending Democracy Taskforce remit, and, if not, which elements of our Government will respond to these threats?
Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)
The task force is looking at a whole range of issues, not just foreign interference and interference in elections; it is also looking at intimidation and actions at general elections and other elections. The National Security Act 2023, which had cross-party support in this House, provides the security services and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to deter and detect the type of influences the noble Lord mentioned. The task force will look at that and, as with the counterterrorism and security review, bring forward proposals in due course to this House and to the House of Commons.