Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to repeal the Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 and, if so, when.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Secretary set out the government’s position in respect of the Illegal Migration Act in her statement to the house on 22nd July 2024. Any legislative plans flowing from the statement will be set out in the normal way in due course.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have fully terminated the UK–Rwanda migration and economic development partnership agreement; and, if not, when they plan to do so.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Migration and Economic Development Partnership has finished. We are currently carrying out a legislative review which includes consideration of the repeal of the Safety of Rwanda Act. More details will be set out in due course.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to improve the personal and cyber security of high-profile individuals involved in politics, such as parliamentarians, ahead of the upcoming general election campaign.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The safety of our elected representatives is essential to the security of our country. Protecting our democratic values and processes is one of the most important duties of government. That is why the Government will take every possible step to safeguard the people, processes, and institutions upon which our democracy relies.
On 28th February the Prime Minister announced the Government was investing an additional £31 million in funding to protect the democratic process and our elected representatives. The funding is being used to strengthen protective security measures for MPs and locally elected representatives over the next year.
Through the funding we are enhancing police capabilities, increasing private sector security provision for those facing a higher risk, and expanding cyber security advice to elected representatives. The investment also enables the expansion of the Operation BRIDGER network, so that every elected representative and candidate is given a dedicated, named police contact to liaise with on security matters, where needed. Through this network all candidates will have access to security briefings in the run up to the General Election.
The funding is accompanied by a new Defending Democracy Policing Protocol, agreed with police to enhance the safety of elected representatives, and protect the UK’s democratic process from disruption. Further information about the Protocol is available on GOV.UK.
Furthermore, the Defending Democracy Taskforce has supported the Westminster Parliamentary authorities and the National Cyber Security Centre to develop and roll out an enhanced cyber security offer for Parliamentarians and their teams to better protect them against cyber-attacks and foreign interference. As part of the £31 million uplift, the Taskforce is now seeking to extend this offer to other elected officials including the Devolved Authorities and is working closely with staff from the Devolved Authorities to do so.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what is their assessment of the risk to British–Iranian journalists in the United Kingdom after threats from the government of Iran, and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in particular.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
Whilst we do not routinely comment on operational matters or specific threats, Iran has been clear in its intentions, publicly calling for the capture or killing of those holding it to account, either in the UK or abroad. Since the start of 2022, Iran has attempted to carry out these threats on numerous occasions, with over 15 credible threats to kill or kidnap British or UK-based individuals.
The UK Government is committed to the promotion of media freedom and takes protection of individuals’ rights, freedoms, and safety very seriously. It is paramount that all media professionals are free to work without fear and journalists must be able to investigate and report independently.
We continually assess potential threats to individuals and take a proactive approach to identifying and investigating them. Wherever a threat is identified, we use all measures, including through the Police and security and intelligence services, to mitigate risk to individuals.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to The Angiolini Inquiry: Part 1 Report published on 29 February, which territorial and national police forces outsource their recruitment vetting to other police forces or other law enforcement agencies.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
All Home Office (territorial) forces in England and Wales conduct their recruitment vetting internally.
This is also the case for all non-Home Office national police forces, aside from the Royal Military Police who are assisted by Warwickshire Police for vetting checks.
The Part 1 report of Angiolini’s Inquiry highlighted that in 2010, the Civil Nuclear Constabulary had outsourced its force vetting to Thames Valley Police. They now carry out their own recruitment vetting.
Asked by: Lord Kempsell (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have identified any current functions of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner that will not be transferred to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner under the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill; and if so, what plans they are making to continue those functions in the future.
Answered by Lord Sharpe of Epsom - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 sets out the functions of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner. Broadly speaking they are to promote compliance by police with the rules on DNA and fingerprints, and to promote good practice by police and local authorities in the use of surveillance cameras respectively.
Overall, the responses to the public consultation on data reform in 2021 indicated that oversight in these areas was crowded and confusing and there was support for simplification. In response the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill abolishes both posts but transfers the Biometrics Commissioner’s casework functions to the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office.
A number of other bodies already operate in this space and will continue to do so. This includes the Information Commissioner’s Office, which amongst other things regulates and promotes good practice by all organisations’ in their use of biometrics and surveillance cameras, including police and local authorities; the Forensic Science Regulator, which ensures that the provision of forensic science services across the criminal justice system is subject to an appropriate regime of scientific quality standards; the Forensic Information Database Strategy Board, which oversees use of the police DNA and fingerprint databases; the College of Policing, which sets requirements, accredits, quality assures and delivers learning and professional development for policing; His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, which independently assesses the effectiveness and efficiency of police forces; the Independent Office for Police Conduct, which investigates the most serious complaints and conduct matters involving the police, and sets the standards by which the police should handle complaints; the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which regulates compliance with equality and human rights law; and the British Standards Institute, which develops British Standards.