Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many police forces have used polygraph tests in each of the last five years, and on how many occasions for each police force, including (1) to inform investigations, (2) to use test results as evidence in court, (3) for risk assessment purposes, (4) in domestic abuse cases and investigations, (5) in sexual offence cases and investigations, and (6) in terrorism cases and investigations.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office does not centrally collect data on the number of police forces using polygraph tests, the frequency of their use, or their application in specific investigation types. Police forces are operationally independent of Government, and it is for chief constables, working with locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners, to determine how best to deploy resources and operational tools.
The Home Office has commissioned research to explore the use of credibility assessment tools within offender management settings. This work identified that credibility assessment tools including polygraphs are being used in some policing and offender management contexts for risk management and intelligence-gathering, rather than evidential purposes. The research identified variation in adoption and use, as well as challenges relating to resources, training, validation and governance.
Through a focused law enforcement working group on Credibility Assessment, stakeholders from policing, the Ministry of Justice and the National Crime Agency have also discussed the need for robust validation, governance and standards surrounding the use of credibility assessment tools to ensure any wider adoption is evidence-led and consistent across organisations, helping to improve understanding of the key considerations associated with their use.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of police use of polygraph tests for (1) informing investigations, (2) use as evidence in court, (3) risk assessment purposes, (4) domestic abuse cases and investigations, (5) sexual offence cases and investigations, and (6) terrorism cases and investigations.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office does not centrally collect data on the number of police forces using polygraph tests, the frequency of their use, or their application in specific investigation types. Police forces are operationally independent of Government, and it is for chief constables, working with locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners, to determine how best to deploy resources and operational tools.
The Home Office has commissioned research to explore the use of credibility assessment tools within offender management settings. This work identified that credibility assessment tools including polygraphs are being used in some policing and offender management contexts for risk management and intelligence-gathering, rather than evidential purposes. The research identified variation in adoption and use, as well as challenges relating to resources, training, validation and governance.
Through a focused law enforcement working group on Credibility Assessment, stakeholders from policing, the Ministry of Justice and the National Crime Agency have also discussed the need for robust validation, governance and standards surrounding the use of credibility assessment tools to ensure any wider adoption is evidence-led and consistent across organisations, helping to improve understanding of the key considerations associated with their use.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what national standards, governance processes and safeguards are in place regarding the use of polygraph tests by police forces.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office does not centrally collect data on the number of police forces using polygraph tests, the frequency of their use, or their application in specific investigation types. Police forces are operationally independent of Government, and it is for chief constables, working with locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners, to determine how best to deploy resources and operational tools.
The Home Office has commissioned research to explore the use of credibility assessment tools within offender management settings. This work identified that credibility assessment tools including polygraphs are being used in some policing and offender management contexts for risk management and intelligence-gathering, rather than evidential purposes. The research identified variation in adoption and use, as well as challenges relating to resources, training, validation and governance.
Through a focused law enforcement working group on Credibility Assessment, stakeholders from policing, the Ministry of Justice and the National Crime Agency have also discussed the need for robust validation, governance and standards surrounding the use of credibility assessment tools to ensure any wider adoption is evidence-led and consistent across organisations, helping to improve understanding of the key considerations associated with their use.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what value for money assessment they have made of the use of polygraph tests by police forces.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office does not centrally collect data on the number of police forces using polygraph tests, the frequency of their use, or their application in specific investigation types. Police forces are operationally independent of Government, and it is for chief constables, working with locally elected Police and Crime Commissioners, to determine how best to deploy resources and operational tools.
The Home Office has commissioned research to explore the use of credibility assessment tools within offender management settings. This work identified that credibility assessment tools including polygraphs are being used in some policing and offender management contexts for risk management and intelligence-gathering, rather than evidential purposes. The research identified variation in adoption and use, as well as challenges relating to resources, training, validation and governance.
Through a focused law enforcement working group on Credibility Assessment, stakeholders from policing, the Ministry of Justice and the National Crime Agency have also discussed the need for robust validation, governance and standards surrounding the use of credibility assessment tools to ensure any wider adoption is evidence-led and consistent across organisations, helping to improve understanding of the key considerations associated with their use.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what use, if any, they have made of the power in section 66 of the Immigration Act 2014 to deprive naturalised citizens of their British citizenship when the consequence is to render them stateless; and what assessment they have made of the utility of that power.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The power to deprive an individual of British citizenship under section 40(4A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 has not been used since its introduction in July 2014.
Following the first statutory review of the power, which was published in April 2016, a further review will be undertaken within 12 months of the power first being used.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what use, if any, has been made of the power in section 66 of the Immigration Act 2014 to deprive naturalised citizens of their British citizenship even when the consequence is to render them stateless; and what assessment they have made of the utility of that power.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Shadow Minister (Business and Trade)
The power to deprive an individual of British citizenship under section 40(4A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 has not been used since its introduction in July 2014. Following the first statutory review of the power, which was published in April 2016, a further review will be undertaken within 12 months of the power first being used.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to deliver on their commitment in the UK–France Joint Leaders’ Declaration of 10 March to ease the travel of school groups to the UK by making changes to documentary requirements for schoolchildren on organised trips from France.
Answered by Lord Murray of Blidworth
At the summit in Paris on 10 March 2023 the UK committed to ease the travel of school groups to the UK by making changes to documentary requirements for schoolchildren on organised trips from France.
We are currently working through the details of implementation and more information, including timescales, will be provided in due course.
This agreement with France will help to strengthen and maintain educational and cultural links with our closest continental neighbour. We will keep the position under review and ensure that we continue to operate our border in the UK's best interests.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Williams of Trafford on 7 October 2020 (HL8400), how many orders have been made under section 40(4A) of the British Nationality Act 1981, depriving a person of citizenship in circumstances where that person is rendered stateless; and when the next review of that power under section 40B of the British Nationality Act will be commissioned.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Shadow Chief Whip (Lords)
The power to deprive an individual of British citizenship under section 40(4A) of the British Nationality Act 1981 has not been used since its introduction in July 2014. As circumstances have not changed since the first statutory review of the power was published in April 2016, a further review of the power will be undertaken within 12 months of the power first being used.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to create a Modern Slavery Risk Register to aid UK companies and individuals to avoid investment in organisations abroad which are alleged to have facilitated modern slavery.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Shadow Chief Whip (Lords)
At present there are no plans to introduce a Modern Slavery Risk Register. However, on 24 March 2021, the Government announced a review of the 2014 Modern Slavery Strategy. The review will consider all aspects of the 2014 strategy and the Government’s response, including our approach to supply chains.
In the meantime, to further enhance transparency, the Government launched an online GOV.UK registry for modern slavery statements. This service enables investors, consumers, NGOs and others to scrutinise the effectiveness of the actions being taken and monitor progress across sectors over time. Since launch, over 6,900 statements have been submitted covering over 23,000 organisations on a voluntary basis. In future, it will be mandatory for in scope organisations to submit their statement to the registry, as part of the planned changes to strengthen section 54 of the Modern Slavery Act.
Asked by: Lord Anderson of Ipswich (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary at the Home Office on 27 January 2021 (UIN 139991), what assessment they have made of the protected characteristics of those deprived of citizenship; and what plans they have, if any, to collect and publish the data on this.
Answered by Baroness Williams of Trafford - Shadow Chief Whip (Lords)
In order for deprivation on ‘conducive to the public good’ grounds to be a consideration, the starting point is an individual’s conduct, that the individual is a terrorist or an extremist, or involved in espionage, war crimes, serious organised crime or similarly dangerous activities, in order to meet the ‘conducive to the public good’ test.
Figures for numbers of conducive deprivation orders, which are made under Section 40(2) of the 1981 British Nationality Act, have been published as part of the HM Government Transparency Report: Disruptive and Investigatory Powers. Four reports have been published to date in 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2020.
Figures are provided on an annual basis and we do not break those figures down further into sub-categories.