Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will continue to support the mandate and recommendations of the United Nations special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, and what action they are taking to ensure the renewal of that mandate, and the implementation of the recommendations.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

The UK supports the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur and welcomes their report on the situation of human rights in Myanmar. As penholder on Myanmar at the UN Security Council, we have convened three meetings so far this year (2025) to maintain international focus and press for accountability. We also co-sponsored the UN Human Rights Council resolution on Myanmar in April and coordinated a joint statement in May calling for an end to violence.

The UK continues to engage with a range of opposition stakeholders, including the National Unity Government, Myanmar diaspora, and civil society organisations. Since the coup, the UK has provided over £190 million in humanitarian aid, including education and support for civil society in Myanmar. The UK continues to lead efforts to keep Myanmar on the international agenda and advocate for human rights.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they will continue to support the existing credentials of the representatives of the National Unity Government of Myanmar at the United Nations, and what steps they are taking to support the renewal of those credentials.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

The UK supports the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur and welcomes their report on the situation of human rights in Myanmar. As penholder on Myanmar at the UN Security Council, we have convened three meetings so far this year (2025) to maintain international focus and press for accountability. We also co-sponsored the UN Human Rights Council resolution on Myanmar in April and coordinated a joint statement in May calling for an end to violence.

The UK continues to engage with a range of opposition stakeholders, including the National Unity Government, Myanmar diaspora, and civil society organisations. Since the coup, the UK has provided over £190 million in humanitarian aid, including education and support for civil society in Myanmar. The UK continues to lead efforts to keep Myanmar on the international agenda and advocate for human rights.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government what redress is available to any academic whose university has failed in its free speech duties in the absence of the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.

This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.

There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.

The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.

No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government, following their statement on 1 August that the overseas transparency provisions of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 “will remain under review while the government assesses the impact of the recently-introduced Foreign Influence Registration Scheme” (FIRS), what assessment they have made of whether FIRS provides sufficient safeguards against undue overseas influence on academic freedom.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The government is clear that foreign interference is unacceptable, and providers are already required to ensure that decisions are taken without direction, coercion or covert influence. Universities are already required by the Office for Students (OfS) to resist any external state threats to academic freedom, and the regulator already has the power to access funding records and take robust action, where it is relevant.

Earlier this year the government strengthened responsibilities for universities on free speech and academic freedom. OfS guidance supporting these requirements published in June made it explicitly clear that universities must resist external state threats to academic freedom, and that suppression of research because of the disapproval of a foreign government is unacceptable in practically any circumstances.

The department is supporting higher education providers to improve international due diligence and raise sector awareness of both foreign interference risks and relevant best practice. This work is underway, alongside evaluation of the implementation of the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme, a new scheme which fully came into effect on the 1 October 2025.

We will keep the overseas funding provisions under review and will act in the event that evidence indicates further transparency reporting is necessary.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to bring into force the overseas transparency provisions of the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, and what plans they have to review whether the uncommenced provisions are still necessary.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The department currently assesses that the overseas funding provisions may duplicate existing information gathering powers and create burden, without the benefit of setting clearer expectations for higher education (HE) providers around appropriate risk mitigation for international partnerships. Providers are already required by the Office for Students to resist any external state threats to academic freedom, and the regulator already has the power to access funding records and take robust action, where it is relevant.

We are seeking to enhance approaches to tackling foreign interference in the sector by engaging with the regulator on setting clearer expectations with providers on due diligence of arrangements, promoting a code of practice for international risk management and cultivating greater expertise on foreign interference in HE.

These are important issues, and it is crucial we support HE providers to maximise international opportunities whilst appropriately mitigating risk. We will keep the overseas funding provisions under review and will act in the event that evidence indicates further transparency reporting is necessary.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 not being in force on academics seeking redress when universities fail to meet their statutory free speech duties, in particular in the case of Professor Laura Murphy at Sheffield Hallam University.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.

This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.

There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.

The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.

No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of a report by the Committee for Academic Freedom on 31 October that the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 may not operate until 2030; and whether such a delay would be acceptable to them.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.

This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.

There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.

The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.

No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government when they intend to bring into force the free speech complaints scheme under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

The complaints scheme in the Higher Education (HE) (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023 needs to be fit for purpose, and that means making changes via primary legislation. In the meantime, the HE sector has new duties in place, as well as requirements to promote freedom of speech, and to put in place Codes of Practice.

This government is seeking a suitable legislative vehicle to amend the provisions in relation to the complaints scheme in due course. These amendments will give the Office for Students (OfS) a power, rather than a duty, to consider complaints from staff and speakers.

There are routes of redress in place for staff, students and external speakers where they believe that an HE provider has breached its duties. For students, this is via the Office of the Independent Adjudicator, whose service is free at the point of use. For staff, it is open to them to bring a judicial review or to make a claim in an employment tribunal. In addition, the OfS already regulates providers in relation to free speech and academic freedom through their existing conditions of registration.

The Director for Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom continues to work with the sector, to offer advice and to share best practice, so providers themselves are more effectively protecting free speech and academic freedom.

No assessment has been made of this report by the Committee for Academic Freedom. The free speech complaints scheme must be effective and workable once it is implemented, and that is why government is working to amend the scheme via primary legislation, to address concerns regarding this scheme, and to provide clear and efficient routes of redress.

Question to the Department for Education:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to protect and defend academic freedom from authoritarian state influence, in the light of recent allegations that Sheffield Hallam University halted the research of Professor Laura Murphy.

Answered by Baroness Smith of Malvern - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

From 1 August 2025, provisions strengthening universities duties in relation to securing freedom of speech and promoting academic freedom came into force, along with a requirement for the Office for Students (OfS) to provide advice and guidance on those matters.

The new OfS guidance, published in June 2025, makes it explicitly clear that universities must resist external state threats to academic freedom and that suppression of research because of the disapproval of a foreign government is unacceptable under any circumstances.

If the OfS identifies a breach of a specific or general ongoing condition of registration as part of its enquiries, then it will consider the use of formal sanctions, which may include monetary penalties, suspension from the register or deregistration.

The department believes more should be done to support higher education providers to maximise international opportunities whilst mitigating risk, which is why we set out in June 2025 that we will work with the regulator to set clearer expectations around international risk management, raise awareness of risks and develop advice on good practice.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what recent representations they have made to the government of Nigeria on ensuring protection of Christians, especially in the middle belt and north of Nigeria; what response they have received; and whether they plan to review extant UK arms export licences to Nigeria.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

I refer the Noble Lord to the answer I provided on 24 November to Question HL11756.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what support they provide to civil-society and faith-based organisations in Nigeria working to address religiously-targeted violence.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

I refer the Noble Lord to the answer I provided on 24 November to Question HL11756.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government when and how they intend to respond to the report by the Children's Commissioner "A production line of pointlessness": Children on custodial remand, published on 11 November.

Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The Government recognises the importance of the Children’s Commissioner’s report and shares concerns about the number of children remanded to custody. We have taken steps to address this, including publishing the Youth Remand Concordat earlier this year to help all partners meet their statutory responsibilities and work effectively together throughout the bail and remand process. We are also supporting local authorities to tackle this issue, for example, by continuing to fund the Greater Manchester remand pilot to enable regional pooling of remand funding, supporting the development of alternatives to custodial remand. Reducing unnecessary remands to custody remains a priority, and we will set out further plans in due course.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government when post-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors sexual dysfunction (PSSD) was added as a yellow card reporting option; who requested it and why; and whether the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency plans to update PSSD reports made before the addition of that option with the MedDRA code 10086208.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for ensuring medicines, medical devices, and blood components for transfusion meet applicable standards of safety, quality, and efficacy. The MHRA rigorously assesses available data, including from the Yellow Card scheme, and seeks advice from their independent advisory committee, the Commission on Human Medicines, where appropriate to inform regulatory decisions.

The MHRA uses the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) to code suspected adverse drug reactions reported by patients and healthcare professionals via the Yellow Card scheme. MedDRA is an international, clinically validated medical terminology used by regulatory authorities and the biopharmaceutical industry throughout the entire regulatory process, from pre-marketing to post-marketing safety monitoring. MedDRA is updated twice annually, and new terms can be proposed by any MedDRA users. The term Post Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Sexual Dysfunction (PSSD) was added to MedDRA as a lower-level term in version 24.1 which was and implemented by the MHRA as a term available to users of the Yellow Card website in February 2022 as part of routine updates.

As part of current routine MHRA processes, Yellow Card reports are not recoded to reflect the changes in the reaction terms available but remain as reported with the terms selected by the original reporter.

As a lower-level term in MedDRA, PSSD is recorded if the reporter has specifically used this term at the time of the report, and since this term can include a wide range of symptoms it would not be appropriate to recode cases not reporting this specific term received prior to 2021. All Yellow Card reports received prior to the availability of PSSD as a MedDRA term will have the individual symptoms reported coded as MedDRA terms and available for signal detection and assessment processes.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many yellow card reports of (1) tinnitus (Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) code 10043882), and (2) worsening of tinnitus (MedDRA code 10048029), the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency received in each year since 2014, and what medications those reported were linked to.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for ensuring medicines, medical devices, and blood components for transfusion meet applicable standards of safety, quality, and efficacy. The MHRA rigorously assesses the available data, including from the Yellow Card scheme, and seeks advice from the Commission on Human Medicines, the MHRA’s independent advisory committee, where appropriate, to inform regulatory decisions, including amending the product information.

The MHRA has received a total of 11,348 United Kingdom based reports through the Yellow Card scheme associated with reaction term tinnitus, including worsening of tinnitus, from 1 January 2014 up to and including 27 November 2025. The reports received between 2014 and 2025 were for a wide range of medicinal products which include antidepressants, hormonal medicines, vaccines, antipsychotics, antibiotics, cardiovascular medicines, drugs used to treat attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, sedatives, drugs used to treat dementia and diabetes, drugs used to treat osteoporosis, Parkinson’s disease, and pain. The following table shows a yearly breakdown of reports associated with tinnitus, from 2014 to 2025, and in total:

It is important to note that anyone can report to the MHRA’s Yellow Card scheme and the recording of these reports in the Yellow Card database does not necessarily mean that the adverse reactions have been caused by the suspect drug. Many factors must be considered in assessing causal relationships, including temporal association, the possible contribution of concomitant medication, and the underlying disease. We encourage reporters to report suspected adverse reaction reports, and the reporter does not have to be sure of a causal association between the drug and the reactions, as a suspicion will suffice.

The number of reports received cannot be used as a basis for determining the incidence of a reaction, as neither the total number of reactions occurring, nor the number of patients using the drug, is known. All fatal reports, including those reporting completed suicide, are assessed by the MHRA, and cumulative information is reviewed at regular intervals.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many yellow card reports of visual snow syndrome (Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities code 10079450) the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency received in each year since 2014, and what medications those reports were linked to.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is responsible for ensuring medicines, medical devices, and blood components for transfusion meet applicable standards of safety, quality, and efficacy. The MHRA rigorously assesses the available data, including from the Yellow Card scheme, and seeks advice from the Commission on Human Medicines, the MHRA’s independent advisory committee, where appropriate, to inform regulatory decisions, including amending the product information.

The MHRA has received a total of 44 United Kingdom based reports through the Yellow Card scheme associated with the reaction term visual snow syndrome received up to and including 25 November 2025. The table attached shows the yearly breakdown of substances associated with visual snow syndrome, each year from 2017 to 2025.

It is important to note that anyone can report to the MHRA’s Yellow Card scheme, and the recording of these reports in the Yellow Card database does not necessarily mean that the adverse reactions have been caused by the suspect drug. Many factors must be considered in assessing causal relationships, including temporal association, the possible contribution of concomitant medication, and the underlying disease. We encourage reporters to report suspected adverse reaction reports, and the reporter does not have to be sure of a causal association between the drug and the reactions, as a suspicion will suffice.

The number of reports received cannot be used as a basis for determining the incidence of a reaction, as neither the total number of reactions occurring, nor the number of patients using the drug, is known. All fatal reports, including those reporting completed suicide, are assessed by the MHRA and cumulative information is reviewed at regular intervals.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to coordinate with other governments efforts to strengthen existing bilateral sanctions and impose additional sanctions to prevent the sale and transfer of aviation fuel to Burma; whether they support the establishment of an aviation fuel embargo and the enforcement of a global arms embargo on the government of Burma through the UN Security Council; and whether they are taking steps to communicate the risk of potential criminal liability to companies involved in the government of Burma’s aviation-fuel supply chain.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

We continue to support the aspirations of the people of Myanmar for a peaceful, democratic future. Any meaningful election needs to be accompanied by an end to violence, a resumption of dialogue among all parties concerned, and must also address the urgent need to allow access for humanitarian assistance, to end human rights violations, and reverse the collapse of public services. We will continue to engage international partners, including ASEAN and at the UN Security Council, on the challenges facing people in Myanmar. On 19 November at the UN Third Committee meeting on Myanmar, the UK delivered a statement, reiterating concern for human rights violations and election plans: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-uk-is-concerned-by-the-ongoing-violence-in-myanmar-including-escalating-human-rights-violations-and-increasing-reports-of-sexual-andgender-based

Since 2021, the UK Government has enacted 19 sanctions packages against the Myanmar regime, including 10 individual sanctions targeting the import of aviation fuel into Myanmar. In 2022 the UK updated our Overseas Business Risk Guidance to make it clear that UK businesses should conduct thorough supply chain diligence to ensure that commodities such as aviation fuel do not reach the military.

We have also sanctioned 25 individuals and 39 entities targeting the regime's access to finance, arms and equipment. We keep all evidence and potential designations under close review. It would not be appropriate to speculate about potential future sanctions designations as to do so could reduce their impact.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with (1) the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), and (2) the outgoing and incoming chairs of ASEAN, namely the governments of Malaysia and the Philippines, regarding the human rights situation in Burma, and the forthcoming elections proposed by the government of Burma.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

We continue to support the aspirations of the people of Myanmar for a peaceful, democratic future. Any meaningful election needs to be accompanied by an end to violence, a resumption of dialogue among all parties concerned, and must also address the urgent need to allow access for humanitarian assistance, to end human rights violations, and reverse the collapse of public services. We will continue to engage international partners, including ASEAN and at the UN Security Council, on the challenges facing people in Myanmar. On 19 November at the UN Third Committee meeting on Myanmar, the UK delivered a statement, reiterating concern for human rights violations and election plans: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-uk-is-concerned-by-the-ongoing-violence-in-myanmar-including-escalating-human-rights-violations-and-increasing-reports-of-sexual-andgender-based

Since 2021, the UK Government has enacted 19 sanctions packages against the Myanmar regime, including 10 individual sanctions targeting the import of aviation fuel into Myanmar. In 2022 the UK updated our Overseas Business Risk Guidance to make it clear that UK businesses should conduct thorough supply chain diligence to ensure that commodities such as aviation fuel do not reach the military.

We have also sanctioned 25 individuals and 39 entities targeting the regime's access to finance, arms and equipment. We keep all evidence and potential designations under close review. It would not be appropriate to speculate about potential future sanctions designations as to do so could reduce their impact.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the forthcoming elections in Burma, in particular whether they will be free or fair.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

We continue to support the aspirations of the people of Myanmar for a peaceful, democratic future. Any meaningful election needs to be accompanied by an end to violence, a resumption of dialogue among all parties concerned, and must also address the urgent need to allow access for humanitarian assistance, to end human rights violations, and reverse the collapse of public services. We will continue to engage international partners, including ASEAN and at the UN Security Council, on the challenges facing people in Myanmar. On 19 November at the UN Third Committee meeting on Myanmar, the UK delivered a statement, reiterating concern for human rights violations and election plans: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-uk-is-concerned-by-the-ongoing-violence-in-myanmar-including-escalating-human-rights-violations-and-increasing-reports-of-sexual-andgender-based

Since 2021, the UK Government has enacted 19 sanctions packages against the Myanmar regime, including 10 individual sanctions targeting the import of aviation fuel into Myanmar. In 2022 the UK updated our Overseas Business Risk Guidance to make it clear that UK businesses should conduct thorough supply chain diligence to ensure that commodities such as aviation fuel do not reach the military.

We have also sanctioned 25 individuals and 39 entities targeting the regime's access to finance, arms and equipment. We keep all evidence and potential designations under close review. It would not be appropriate to speculate about potential future sanctions designations as to do so could reduce their impact.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of legislating to provide that British National (Overseas) visa holders are not subject to immigration control; and what plans they have to grant holders of British National (Overseas) status a statutory right of abode in the United Kingdom.

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Government remains steadfast in its support for members of the Hong Kong community in the UK and is fully committed to the British National (Overseas) (BN(O) route, which will continue to welcome Hong Kongers. We confirmed in the earned settlement consultation document A Fairer Pathway to Settlement (CP1448) that those on the BN(O) route will retain a five-year route to settlement. We have no plans to legislate to create a right of abode for BN(O)s, or to otherwise exempt them from immigration control.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of recent sectarian atrocities and abductions of children in Nigeria, and the underlying causes; and what recent discussions they have had with the government of Nigeria about securing the release of abductees and bringing the perpetrators to justice.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

I refer the Noble Lord to the written statement that I made to the House on 27 November (UIN HLWS1104).

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Chapman of Darlington on 24 November (HL11698 and HL11699), what representations they have made to the government of Nigeria about targeted killings, UK arms exports, and the support provided to civil society and faith-based organisations working to address religiously-targeted violence.

Answered by Baroness Chapman of Darlington - Minister of State (Development)

I refer the Noble Lord to the written statement that I made to the House on 27 November (UIN HLWS1104).

Question to the Home Office:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many British Chambers of Commerce have registered under the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme

Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)

Certain information registered under the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS) will be published, where the registration relates to political influence activities. No registrations by British Chambers of Commerce are included on the public register at this point.

Registrations under the enhanced tier will not be published, unless they relate to political influence activities. Additionally, registrations will not be published where an exception to publication applies, for example where publication could create a risk to the safety or interests of the UK. We will not provide details of registrations beyond that which is on the public register as to do so could identify information not intended to be published and undermine the scheme’s objectives.

However, the Government will be publishing an annual report setting out, among other things, the number of registrations, number of information notices issued, the number of persons charged with an offence and the number of persons convicted of an offence. The first report will be published as soon as practicable after 30 June 2026.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what are the anticipated commencement dates for each of the provisions in the Public Office (Accountability) Bill.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

The Government will not delay bringing the measures in the Public Office (Accountability) Bill into force.

We are urgently looking at what is required effectively to implement each of the measures.

We will update the House in due course on the planned timeline for implementation and commencement.

Found: Website www.parliament.uk From the Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights Lord Alton of Liverpool

Found: Lammy MP Deputy Prime Minister Lord Chancellor & Secretary of State for Justice Lord Alton of Liverpool

Found: MacAlister OBE MP Minister for Children and Families 2025-0042583 The Rt Hon Lord Alton of Liverpool

Found: BT1 4GF E: correspondence@nio.gov.uk www.gov.uk/nio Follow us on X @NIOgov Lord Alton of Liverpool

Found: Yours sincerely, Lord Alton of Liverpool Chair, Joint Committee on Human Rights

Found: From the Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights Yours sincerely, Lord Alton of Liverpool

Found: Yours sincerely, Lord Alton of Liverpool Chair, Joint Committee on Human Rights