UK Migration

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Sahota]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the number of people migrating into the UK in each of the last five years.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

Net migration increased from 2021 to record levels in 2023, reaching 944,000 at its peak. Since 2023, numbers have fallen substantially. Net migration fell to 171,000 by the end of 2025—an 82% decrease compared to the peak and the lowest level since the pandemic.

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for that. I congratulate the Government on reducing net migration from, as the Minister said, its peak of 900,000 to 171,000, an impressive reduction of approximately 82%. However, despite this significant progress, a recent opinion poll suggests that almost half the public still believe that immigration is continuing to increase. This misconception is being exploited by the right-wing political parties and risks creating unnecessary division and disharmony within our communities. What more can the Government do to ensure that the public are made aware of the accurate immigration figures and are better informed about the progress that has been made?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

My noble friend makes an important point. Immigration is a very sensitive issue, but it is also multifaceted. The figures on net migration are falling, the number of asylum claims being processed is increasing, and we have to deal with the small boats, the numbers of which are reducing. But we also have the very valuable contribution that many people who have come to this country make—from doctors to bus drivers, to factory workers, to people involved in our society as a whole. I therefore say to those on the far right who seek to exploit this that we are a cohesive, multicultural society, and we have people here who are contributing. We have to meet certain challenges, and this Government are prepared to meet them.

[Baroness Coffey (Con)]

My Lords, I am very conscious that, under the points-based system, many people came into this country on a variety of visas. However, in the last two years, over half a million people have acquired British citizenship. What assessment have the Government made of the Home Secretary’s proposed policy change to extend the right to acquire ILR—and, I assume, citizenship—to 10 years, in terms of the number of people who will gain British citizenship in the next decade?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

We keep that matter under review. As the noble Baroness will know, we introduced an immigration Bill in the House of Commons last week, which will bring significant changes. This Government are trying to get control of migration and citizenship issues across the board, and we are doing our best to, dare I say it, rectify some of the difficulties of the previous 14 years.

[Lord German (LD)]

My Lords, I declare an interest in that I am supported by the RAMP organisation. The Minister has rightly put the contribution that migration brings to this country at the forefront. It is in all our interests to make sure that people integrate into our society as rapidly as possible, so can the Minister tell us what the Government are doing to speed that process up and make it more accessible? Perhaps I might refer him to the contribution of the noble Lord, Lord Griffiths of Burry Port, who has just produced a report on such matters, including the role of diasporas in the United Kingdom.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Lord. I have not yet had a chance to read my noble friend’s report, but undoubtedly, I will read it—because he will send it to me if nobody else does. We have to recognise that we are a multicultural society. The people who, historically, have come to the United Kingdom have had ties to it through many Commonwealth countries. The people who are coming here are bringing skills and making important contributions to our society; we should recognise that, and we should celebrate and respect their differences and their different faiths. Through my noble friend Lord Lemos, who is Faith Minister, the Government are trying to ensure that we recognise that contribution, and it is a constant challenge to make sure that we do so. One of the great challenges is making sure we have a strong, managed migration system, so that people can see that it is transparent and fair.

[Baroness Black of Strome (CB)]

My Lords, children coming into the country are an important part of our migration and immigration. What scientific methods are currently being used to assess the age of our immigrants, and how many appeals against those determinations have been upheld? I declare an interest as the previous chair of the Home Office’s age estimation committee.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I cannot give the noble Baroness the exact figures on the appeals, but I will look into that and write to her. We are trying to ensure that we achieve accurate age assessment through high levels of technology, and we are introducing that technology at ports of entry to ensure that we can make a rough estimate of the age of individuals arriving in the United Kingdom, and whether they are over or under 18. I will write to the noble Baroness in due course to confirm all those details.

[Viscount Goschen (Con)]

My Lords, when will the Government have a computerised system in place that can accurately track both entry into and exit from the United Kingdom, and therefore give the Government an accurate picture of who is here and what their status is at any one time?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

That is a very important point, and knowing not just who arrives but who leaves is certainly a key issue. We are trying to modernise that infrastructure. In particular, we are looking at how we can use AI to improve the assessment of the information we have. I will certainly reflect on what the noble Viscount has said and respond to him on what we are doing on those issues.

[Baroness Nargund (Lab)]

My Lords, the Health Foundation has just published a significant report with the latest evidence on immigration and the NHS. The report finds that the average person who migrates to the UK is more likely to work in the NHS, less likely to use it, and significantly contributes to NHS funds. Around one in five staff working in the NHS are non-British nationals. Will my noble friend the Minister consider this latest evidence, particularly when it comes to workers in the NHS and in social care? It will be significant in helping our health and social care workforce.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I will certainly look at the report my noble friend has cited. I also want to place on record my thanks to and recognition of the value of all those who contribute to the National Health Service. As my noble friend has said, many of them originally came to this country as non-British nationals and are now naturalised Britons. Their contributions should never be underestimated. However, that does not take away from the fact that we need to ensure that those Britons who are currently unemployed and who aspire to work in the health service can also do so. One of the objectives of the Government’s migration programme is to ensure that we build up the skills and talent of people of British heritage who were born in the United Kingdom.

[Lord Cameron of Lochiel (Con)]

My Lords, it has recently been revealed that, despite the previous Government placing restrictions on dependants for those on health and social care visas, people are still bringing in huge numbers of dependants. Some 12 such visas were issued to nationals of Cameroon, who were able to bring 180 people with them. I do not say this to make any great political point, but I am sure the Minister agrees that this is not how the system is supposed to operate. In the light of that, do the Government have any plans to rectify this situation?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Lord for raising this issue. We have seen some reports on the issue of dependants of health and social care visa holders remaining exempt from the surcharge, and on such visa holders bringing in family members. We are looking at this, but some aspects of the stories currently in the press are incorrect, and it is incorrect to link dependant visas granted in a given year with worker visas granted in the same period. I will look at the issue the noble Lord has mentioned and send him a note; but, while he himself has not been inaccurate, there are some inaccuracies in the reporting of this.

[Lord Redwood (Con)]

What sustainable rate of net inward migration would the Government like to see going forward?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

Unlike previous Governments, we are not setting a net migration target. We are trying to ensure—and our success in this was proved in my initial Answer to my noble friend—that we manage migration in an effective way. We have seen a massive drop in the net migration figure from when the noble Lord’s Government were in power. Setting a target would achieve exactly what Conservative Prime Ministers have done throughout the last 14 years: set a target but introduce no policy objectives to achieve it, and fail to take into account the needs of the British people and the British economy.

[Lord Scriven (LD)]

My Lords, there are roughly 7,000 vacancies for doctors in the NHS. According to the BMA’s records, nearly 2,000 registered refugees have a medical qualification, and some of them have been waiting over two years for their asylum application to be processed. Would it not be a good idea to have a system whereby, over a period of time, if someone’s asylum claim has not been processed, they are allowed to work, pay taxes and contribute to the country?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

With respect to the noble Lord, I prefer to tackle the problem from the other direction. I prefer to ensure, as the Government are trying to do now, that we speed up asylum processing and claims and get decisions on asylum. That way, those who are entitled to asylum have it granted, those who are not are returned to a safe country, and we process that in a speedy way. We have put investment and resources into that. It is not right and proper to ensure the possibility of work while asylum claims are being processed, and we are trying to speed up that processing.

European Entry and Exit System

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Cameron of Lochiel (Con)]

My Lords, there have clearly been serious issues across Europe this year in relation to the new European entry system and it is no secret that implementation has been poor. However, the European Union seems to be under the impression that the new entry and exit system is working well. What discussions have the Government had with the European Union about improving the system?

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

The Government are in constant dialogue with the European Union. We are working closely with European member states to ensure that the juxtaposed ports have the right technology and processes to enable travel to be as smooth as possible for UK citizens. This has included providing £3.5 million in funding to each of the three ports to help make their changes to infrastructure. We will continue to discuss with European partners how we can ensure that we have as smooth an operation as possible in the interests of both the European Union and British travellers.

[Baroness Ludford (LD)]

My Lords, the root cause of the EES misery that British people are suffering is Brexit. There is no running away from that. But my enthusiasm for the EU does not blind me to its flaws, and this is one of them. Will the Government convene an emergency UK-EU meeting with the European Commission before 20 July—perhaps this can be one of Keir Starmer’s leaving presents—to address the disruption and shambles that is the EES, unfortunately, and protect British travellers during the summer peak?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Baroness is right that, were we still a member of the European Union, this issue would not be a problem. She knows how I voted in the referendum and she knows that this is a consequence of that referendum and decision. Having said that, we are where we are. The European Union is responsible for its management of the schemes. As I said to the noble Lord, Lord Cameron of Lochiel, we are in constant contact. She asked for an emergency summit; we are holding a summit continuously. We are in constant contact with the authorities and we hope to ensure that the transfer of passengers through the three juxtaposed ports is smooth and efficient.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, I have a general question for the noble Lord. I thank him for what he is doing to try to smooth things for passengers from here across Europe. Is it right that a British passenger has to check in for each new country in the EU that they visit, whereas European passengers coming here from the EU check in just once? Is that something that he could alleviate in the discussions he is having with our European partners?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The operation of the EES is a matter for the European Community and its member states. There are different approaches, but my understanding now is that the European Union is trying to get a consistent approach from European countries across the board. It is not for us as a third-party state to have that intervention with European partners, but we can raise issues and we are doing so. We are looking at how we can off-set the concerns that are raised and are trying to ensure smooth transfer, particularly in the three ports that we have—Eurostar, Eurotunnel and the Port of Dover.

[Lord Deben (Con)]

Would not the Minister agree that this is an interesting example of how, when we thought we would take back control, actually we have given over control in areas where we could have been part of the solution?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Lord, as ever, is wise, moderate and considered. He makes points that I may share on behalf of the UK Government, but I say to him again that, sadly, we are where we are.

[Baroness Butler-Sloss (CB)]

A few months ago I flew to Málaga, where they had decided not to apply the new system. Is it possible to persuade the EU to put off the system until October?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The system is operational. I have travelled to a European country in the last two months and had to ensure that my credentials were checked and established in the proper way. The operation of the scheme is a matter for the European Union. We are a third-party country. We are trying to ensure that it is as smooth as possible. We have had discussions with our European partners and will continue to do so. As I said earlier, we have put in some £3.5 million of UK taxpayers’ money to ensure that the challenges are at least ameliorated as far as possible.

[Lord Hannan of Kingsclere (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I sense this is going against the masochistic mood of the House, but how is a failure of the EU our fault? The noble Baroness, Lady Ludford, in asking her question, said her fondness for the EU does not blind her to the fact that this is a chaotic and badly implemented scheme—for everyone, not just for us. Any third-country national trying to enter the EU will run up against these problems. How is that our responsibility? If there is a bad immigration system in Uzbekistan or Venezuela, that is not our fault. Incredibly, not everything is the fault of Brexit.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Lord tempts me. It is not our responsibility and it is an EU scheme, but it is our problem if lorries and cars are backed up at Dover, if our citizens cannot get into a European country easily and if we have that general mess. The point the noble Baroness made, which I thought he would have recognised given that he is a strong advocate of Brexit, was that, had we not had the referendum and the Brexit decision, we would have been part of the decision-making process on that very system. Now we are not; we are a third-party country because of the decision he advocated, which I remind the House I opposed.

[Lord Dubs (Lab)]

My Lords, in the Government’s discussions with the French and other authorities, are we looking at the possibility that people could register in advance of travelling so that they would be good for two years rather than having to do it at the time of their first journey?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

Again, my noble friend tempts me. The operation of this scheme is one for the European Union. We have made a number of representations to see how we can make this more efficient and simpler from the UK perspective. That includes putting in place contingency plans with the police and others for any potential back-up at the ports in the United Kingdom. It also includes working closely and raising issues with all European nations to make sure that we can make this as smooth as possible. I cannot be the European Union, even for the noble Lord, Lord Hannan. What I can be is the UK’s representative making representations about how we can ensure that, from our perspective, this system works as well as possible.

[Baroness Foster of Oxton (Con)]

My Lords, having spent many years of my former life in the airline industry and then commuting to Brussels and Strasbourg, I must say in all sincerity that post Brexit the UK really did step up. As a country, we have not made life difficult for EU citizens to come here as tourists and in jobs that they may do. However, we have found that a number of member states, though not every state, continue to make life extremely difficult—I have no idea why—for British travellers, lorries and various others crossing the channel. This is about urging the Government; I know the Minister is trying very hard, but it is called a quid pro quo. We are where we are. This is 10 years on. If we take this in good faith and treat our EU passengers well, which we do, it is not beyond the wit of man for it to be reciprocated for British travellers going abroad.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

If there are problems in the system, they are not problems for the British but for any third-party nation. We just happen to be a third-party nation now and I imagine that it is also a problem for Americans and others wishing to enter the EU. In that sense, I sort of agree with the noble Lord, Lord Hannan—something I never expected to say—that it is for the EU to sort out. We are trying to make sure that we help as much as we can to sort out that issue so that it does not impact on UK citizens.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, this is perhaps a rather self-interested question because, like some other Members, I will be travelling to Europe during the Summer Recess. Of the three major ports—Dover, Eurostar and the Channel Tunnel—does my noble friend have any idea in advance which is likely to find itself under the greatest strain as a result of this system and, as a result, get the resources to alleviate that?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I hope my noble friend enjoys his holiday. We are trying to have no problems at any of the three juxtaposed ports. If he wants to, he can look at GOV.UK and the Foreign Office website to get regular live updates as to what is happening at each port. I say again that, if there are particular challenges at a particular time, we have contingency plans in place—particularly for the roads approaching Dover, with Kent Police and the Medway authorities—to ensure that we manage them in an effective way. I am hoping for a smooth transfer, but I urge all noble Lords and others who are traveling to examine websites, look at the information and, as ever, give sufficient time to travel, whatever happens.

Police Leadership Commission Report

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Wednesday 8th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Doocey (LD)]

My Lords, I welcome the report from the noble Lords, Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert, which rightly starts with an uncomfortable truth: leadership across policing is too inconsistent and, for decades, we have failed to invest in developing leaders for the world they now face.

We support clearer standards, stronger developments of all ranks, and more transparent senior appointments, but consistency must not become Whitehall control. Before creating a national police service and a national academy, the Government must explain how police chiefs will be protected from politicisation. A central appointments panel may help, but only if it insulates chief constables’ appointments from political influence and ensures a diverse candidate pool, including those with neighbourhood and safeguarding experience.

We urgently need clarity about what we expect policing to deliver in the 2030s. Too often the police are left to pick up responsibilities that properly belong to other agencies, because those agencies are underfunded and lack the capacity to respond. But the police cannot walk away; they have a duty to the public, even when the work falls outside their remit. This results in police being increasingly drawn into non-crime work, spending hours in hospitals awaiting mental health assessments or caring for vulnerable children, leaving forces overstretched and officers shuttled from one crisis to another.

Ethical leadership cannot be a values programme instead of the hard work that inquiries have already recommended. Delivering ethics requires legally enforceable vetting and misconduct standards across forces, a complete overhaul of the complaints investigations so that they do not drift for years, and transparent monitoring of disproportionality in discipline, including for BAME officers. The public will not judge us by how many workshops we run but by whether the Angiolini, Jay and inspectorate recommendations are finally implemented in full.

Around 80% of crime now has a digital element, yet policing is still largely analogue, with 43 forces running separate IT systems and an obsolete police national computer. Outdated, poorly connected systems with multiple entry points heighten cyber security risks, given the high value of police data on the dark web. A lack of national co-ordination and the scrapping of ring-fenced capital funding means that most technology spending is now used just to maintain existing outdated systems. What is needed is a unified cloud-based technology platform and common procurement to enable seamless information sharing and good practice across forces. This will require very significant investments in IT and AI but offers the prospect of rapid returns in improved outcomes and would finally allow policing to exploit the wealth of operational data already at its fingertips.

We need national training frameworks that prioritise digital investigation skills for every officer and proper professional pathways for cyber, data, digital and forensic specialists. But highly trained specialists are locked into the same nationally set pay scales as everyone else, and chiefs have virtually no flexibility to pay them more than an entry-level constable. That is almost unbelievable. Is it therefore surprising that these specialists are routinely poached by the private sector, after they have been trained by the police for many years, on salaries that are several multiples of their police pay? If we are serious about tackling AI-enabled fraud, deepfake child abuse imagery and complex online exploitation, we must introduce genuine pay flexibilities for shortage specialties and parity of esteem for police staff.

I am deeply concerned that we are proposing a national academy and a licence to practise when there has been no independent national audit of police training since 2012. Officers need high-quality, regular, properly accredited refresher training to keep themselves and the public safe. If the College of Policing is absorbed into a new police service, we must avoid the police marking their own homework by ensuring that appropriate standards are set and independently audited.

This report gives us an opportunity to transform how we choose and develop leaders. But those leaders will succeed only if we define the mission clearly, fix the broken funding and training systems, and give policing the technological tools and special staff it needs. I very much hope the Government are prepared to meet those challenges.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

I place on record my thanks to my noble friend Lord Blunkett and the noble Lord, Lord Herbert of South Downs, for their work on this important report commissioned by the Home Office to look at the important issues of policing. My noble friend Lord Blunkett is a former Home Secretary and the noble Lord, Lord Herbert, is a former Policing Minister; indeed, I shadowed him for a while in a previous life. They both bring extremely important experience to bear and on a cross-party basis they have examined the future training needs of the police service.

My noble friend and the noble Lord have made 27 recommendations and, in answer to the points raised by the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, we are going to consider those recommendations. We are going to examine them in detail. We want to give them a fair wind. We will report back in the autumn with our response to those recommendations. I will be able to provide further clarity and discussion at that time on the Government’s approach to the points that have been made.

I begin in, I hope, a constructive way but also in a way of challenge to say that I do not accept the characterisation of the police to date by the noble Lord, Lord Davies. The police are doing a very good job in dangerous circumstances. Police officers at every level, from chief constables to ordinary police officers on the beat to police community support officers, do a very strong job. Our duty is to ensure that the recommendations that have been made by my noble friend Lord Blunkett and the noble Lord, Lord Herbert, help support those police officers to do a better job in the future.

Crime is down: theft offences by 11%; vehicle-related crime by 14%; domestic burglary by 22%; shoplifting by 1%; personal robbery by 12%; knife-enabled offences by 10%; knife-enabled homicides by 21%; and knife-enabled robberies by 15%. Those are just some examples from the past 18 months of statistics of how the police are helping to tackle those issues. But that does not mean that there is not room for improvement.

The noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, has pressed me many times to examine the issue of training; she is absolutely right to do so, and these recommendations form the basis of us examining how we can take those issues forward. I do not accept that we should not put diversity at the heart of our police service. I want to see diverse police officers representing their communities and representing the communities they police. But it is important that we secure training and support for all those officers, whatever their ethnic background.

There is a need for reform. The noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, is absolutely right that we need to examine what policing is for and how to ensure that we have the back-room support for front-line police officers. She and the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, will know that we are in the middle of a radical programme of police reform. We are abolishing police and crime commissioners. We are waiting for a report from the noble Lord, Lord Hogan-Howe, on police force areas. We are establishing a national police service, which will encompass the very issues currently considered by the noble Lord, Lord Herbert of South Downs, as chair of the College of Policing, with national procurement and a focus on what national policing should do, which is, from the National Crime Agency’s perspective, serious organised crime, counterterrorism policing and other important issues such as economic crime.

This reform programme is ongoing, but self-evidently —and this is where I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Davies, and the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey—we need to put in place support and training to ensure that police officers both meet the needs of the 21st century and have the support to do their job in an effective way. In their report, my noble friend Lord Blunkett and the noble Lord, Lord Herbert, have put great care and skill into the recommendations. I also thank the other members of the commission who took part.

There is a particular emphasis on giving voice to those on the front line. It is right to say, as the report itself says, that

“the policing profession has not consistently had the excellent leadership it needs”.

The commission has highlighted the critical importance of leadership and we all know that. It will also ensure, I hope, that we maintain that principle of policing by consent.

It is right that we take time to consider the recommendations in full. We welcome the commission’s proposals and the intent behind them. We are actively looking at the recommendation to create a formal senior constable rank and how that can be done. The commission also recommends a new professional digital passport for policing, along with other measures to put in place stronger supporting structures around professional development. The review’s recommendations on a fast stream for policing, on a targeted direct entry scheme and on the role of the forthcoming national police service in promoting ethical policing are all issues that we want to look at and respond to. We will do so in due course.

The points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, about police conduct and ethical standards of policing are extremely important. She will know from when we passed the Crime and Policing Act recently, because we spent a gazillion hours dealing with it in this House of Parliament, that there is a strong emphasis in it on improving the performance of the ethical standards and on the ability to remove police officers who are not performing well. Again, that goes to the heart of the recommendations before us.

In summary, the noble Lords, Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert, will both know that I cannot respond today to the 27 recommendations, but I welcome them. They give us a strong foundation to examine how we can improve police leadership, police performance and skill levels to face the 21st century. It is a valuable piece of work. I commit to the House, on the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, that we will report back in the autumn on the recommendations and what we intend to do about delivering them.

In the meantime, there are police officers and leaders out on the streets now, and they are doing a dangerous job on behalf of us all. They should have our admiration but they should also have our support in improving their performance, and that is what the recommendations are aimed at doing.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate (Non-Afl)]

I support the provision dealing with senior constables, and I wish the implementation of the commission’s report every success.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to my noble friend for bringing his experience of policing at a leadership level to the debate and this discussion. He will know that leadership is critical in delivering high performance and for the public. The recommendations intend to help generate that discussion and to focus on how we improve leadership. Last year, for example, we had significant levels of vacancy for chief constable positions and a relatively small pool, sometimes internal, of people applying for them. We need to encourage better use of senior leadership.

I was a Member of Parliament for 28 years and my local police force probably had around 30 police superintendents during that time. That is not sustainable for continuity and performance. We have very strong leadership at the top of the triangle but a large pool of officers at the bottom end who need to be recognised for the work they do, and encouraged to have training and to have ambition to go through the system in a positive way. We will look at the recommendations and I give my noble friend the assurance that we will report back when we have had a chance to consider them in detail.

[Baroness Stuart of Edgbaston (CB)]

My Lords, I am grateful for the report and I see that the recommendations include the creation of a national academy of police leadership. I declare my interest, as the First Civil Service Commissioner, as a regulator for entry into the senior Civil Service. I argue that, at that level of leadership, the different professions—whether it be the Armed Forces, the police or the most senior civil servants—have a lot to learn from each other and would benefit from each other’s experiences. As the Government respond to that, I urge the Minister to look at other professions and top-level leadership so that they can learn from each other and exchange their experiences.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

My noble friend brings great experience from her role in the Civil Service Commission to the matter of recruiting individuals at a senior level. It is quite clear—the report makes this point very strongly—that police officers at all levels must be able to develop skills earlier in their career to enable them to develop and progress. The commission’s report highlights the fact that policing needs a clearer and more coherent system that supports professional development at all ranks. As the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, mentioned, there are undoubtedly lessons and models that can be looked at in other aspects of society that will help support the development process.

[Lord Young of Acton (Con)]

My Lords, I declare my interest as the director of the Free Speech Union. I welcome this report, which contains many sensible suggestions.

Gavin Stephens, the chairman of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, announced a review last month of guidance contained in the NPCC and College of Policing’s race action plan and its anti-racism commitment. That guidance suggested that officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes, defined as equalising arrest and charging rates between different groups. Given that some ethnic groups are more likely to commit crimes than others, that inevitably means treating some groups more leniently than others—aka, two-tier policing. Will the Minister give the House a progress report on Gavin Stephens’s review of this guidance? Can he also tell us when the independent review into hate crime and public order legislation by the noble Lord, Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, will be published? A couple of weeks ago the Minister said that it would be published before the Summer Recess.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

On the latter point, we are hoping to publish the review as soon as possible. As the noble Lord will recognise, there are some things that the Government wish to announce but which they are not able to due to the upcoming change of Prime Minister. However, I intend to publish the document as soon as is practicable and will ensure that a report is made to the House in due course.

With due respect, I do not accept the noble Lord’s contention that there is two-tier policing. The document to which he refers is designed to give guidance to officers to understand the various pressures and some of the diversity issues that exist. Ultimately, officers deal with crime, no matter who commits it or where it is committed. They need to bring people to justice and make arrests accordingly. I will reflect on what he said and will discuss the matter, via our offices in the Home Office, with Gavin Stephens of the National Police Chiefs’ Council but, from my perspective, the general contention is that crime is crime, the police are there to deal with it, and we must have an understanding of the diversity issues in order to have the confidence of the whole community when dealing with those issues.

[Lord Grocott (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for making this Statement. As he is in his place, I must also mention my noble friend Lord Blunkett, who brings experience and common sense to pretty much everything he does. There is a “but” coming, and it is this: I get slightly worried when I see phrases in a Statement such as

“a new police leadership fast stream”,

and

“a focus on leaders from professions with transferable skills”.

The first thing leaders need for leadership is respect from the people they are trying to lead. They will not get the same proportion of respect unless the police constables, in whatever force in the country, know that the leaders have been through the same traumas, challenges and anxieties that a normal policeman finds in his normal work, such as when he has to break up a fight in a city centre. I am not sure a degree helps a great deal with dealing with issues like that. I would therefore like my noble friend to assure me that police recruitment does not just need to be diverse, although it is important to represent the community; it also needs to be diverse in people’s professional and other backgrounds, just as much as it does in academic qualification.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to my noble friend; it is good to see him in his place. The recommendations are looking at how we can significantly improve senior leadership. Some of the recommendations may mean that we need to look at how we fast-track individuals to leadership and, in doing so, how we give them effective training and support to understand the issues that they face. Ultimately, the core element of policing is the officer on the beat, male or female, who deals with the fight on a Saturday night, who deals with the shoplifter, who deals with anti-social behaviour, and who deals with all the issues that police officers deal with on a regular basis—including, as the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, said, issues that are not directly their responsibility but which they have to deal with, because they are the last, and first, port of call in many cases.

With this whole package, we are trying to look at how we improve skill levels across the board, and that might well include looking at how we give greater skills, support and training to the front-line police officer. However, a clear issue has been identified: the failure of effective management at a senior level in some areas. It is equally important that that is addressed, and that is what we intend to do when we have a chance to reflect on the recommendations.

[Baroness Wheatcroft (CB)]

My Lords, I welcome the report and the sensible recommendations in it. It highlights the current importance of cliques and networks in promotions in the police. There are comments such as:

“If you don’t have a network, you’re not going to get a promotion.”


The Met has decided that membership of organisations such as the Freemasons has to be declared, and many hundreds have declared their membership, but has that made any difference, and do other forces go far enough? Does the Minister think that more needs to be done to rule out the sort of nepotism and networks that have meant that, in the end, the pool of talent is much reduced?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Baroness makes a very interesting point on the discussions. I believe that promotions should be made on merit. They should be made on the skills and adaptations of individual officers to do the next job that they face—or, for an ordinary police constable, on the different types of skills that might be required, such as those that do not necessarily involve being on the beat. That should be done on merit. Going back to the recommendations that have been made, the commission’s report highlights that policing needs a clearer and more coherent system that supports professional development and, by that very mechanism, supports people being promoted on merit. When we have a chance to reflect on those recommendations, I hope that will be at the heart of what we do.

[Lord Paddick (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I declare my interest as a non-executive director of the Metropolitan Police. I welcome this report, but a lot of it appears to be reinventing wheels that came off policing many years ago. For example, we had a physical, centrally located police staff college—a centre of excellence—as this report recommends, and by the time I reached chief superintendent I had had 18 months of full-time police leadership training, the same as an equivalent Army officer, on an accelerated promotion scheme as a non-graduate. Most of this was lost because of cuts to national police training budgets. Because of my declared interests, I am not allowed to ask for more money for policing, so I will put it like this: what will the Government do to make these recommendations a reality?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

Maybe I should also have declared an interest, because I have a very close relative—a daughter—who works as a serving police officer. The key thing is that, while 27 recommendations have been given to the Government and we have to look at and assess them, we accept the general tenor of what the noble Lords, Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert, have said. We need to improve the basic level of training, look at the skills needed for the 21st century, improve senior leadership and the training for it, and make sure that we have a wider pool for people to reach the senior chief constable positions. There is a very limited pool for chief constables at the moment and, very often, internal candidates have been inoculated through the police forces they have worked in, generally without any examination.

As part of wider reforms, as the noble Lord will know, we are looking at improving the College of Policing’s work by merging with it a senior level of activity. We are looking to shrink the number of police forces to give more effective local control and change the management structures from police and crime commissioners to mayors and other authorities, as part of a wider programme that the recommendations from the noble Lords, Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert, fit into. I cannot give definitive answers now but, as I have said, we will report back on the recommendations and our responses as soon as practicable.

[Lord Sahota (Lab)]

My Lords, I read this report from cover to cover. It acknowledges that ethnic-minority officers have a poorer retention rate and slower progression because they continue to face discrimination within their organisation. Some 20 years ago, when I was on the West Mercia Police Authority as a councillor, I raised this issue constantly, yet here we are and ethnic-minority officers are still leaving at a far higher rate than white officers. This report acknowledges this issue, yet it offers no tangible or practical solution to this problem. Does my noble friend agree?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to my noble friend. It is important that the police reflect the communities they serve. Many parts of this United Kingdom have populations with a level of ethnic-minority British citizens who will want to see people who look like them in the police service. The point he makes is extremely important. Once we have recruited individuals, we need to value them, retain them and train them for the future, not lose that skill to outside businesses or because they are facing discrimination inside the force. The recommendations highlight the problem; we need to examine how we improve that. I want the police service to reflect the community it serves.

[Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd (CB)]

My Lords, the Minister has explained over and over again the number of changes that are occurring. I welcome them all, just as I welcome the noble Lords’ report. However, there are various ways in which these changes can be implemented. Can we have in the autumn a broad strategic overview, pulling together leadership, governance and the changing of the police forces? All of these interlock, so it would be of immense assistance to this House if someone could be asked to produce an overall strategic document, dealing also with the very real issues of technology.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord. I will take that suggestion away and discuss with my right honourable friend the Home Secretary how and whether we can do that. We had a police White Paper which has led to the changes that will see legislative approval, as announced in the King’s Speech this May. He makes a valid point. At some point we will have to pull these strands together. I can commit only that changes to senior levels of activity at a national level and to local policing will be put into the potential police Bill announced in the King’s Speech. I will respond to these suggestions in due course. There are a range of issues that we are continually dealing with, so I will take his suggestion away.

[Lord Blunkett (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank my noble friend for his generous response. With the House’s indulgence, I want to say what a great pleasure it has been, and how much I appreciate the tremendous collaboration with the noble Lord, Lord Herbert of South Downs, the 10 other commissioners who generously gave their time, the secretariat from the college and my own employee, Joanna Firth. On the response in the autumn, if anything is going to happen quickly, it will be fundamental that recommendation 27 to set up an implementation group be put front and centre, because without immediate steps to bring these recommendations to fruition, they will languish on a shelf until another report some years hence will come back with the same recommendations we are making today.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I assure my noble friend that when we have agreed the recommendations, we will make sure that we include the very point he mentioned. If I sit down now, it gives one other Member a chance to ask a question.

[Lord Barber of Chittlehampton (Lab)]

My Lords, it is an honour to follow my noble friend Lord Blunkett. I congratulate the noble Lords, Lord Blunkett and Lord Herbert, on an outstanding report. Does the Minister agree that police leadership is at its best when police leaders feel they can confidently take on crime, and have the skills they need, the backing they deserve from Government and the active support of the other public services involved in tackling crime in our country?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

Absolutely—that is central to what the Government seek to achieve. I again pay tribute to both noble Lords, their staff, the commission members and the voluntary staff who supported them. They have tried to identify the challenges in leadership, and that the policing landscape and crime are changing—some 45% of crime is online fraud. The police will face a range of new challenges, and we need effective, strong leaders who reflect their communities, understand the levels of crime and have the strategic skills to tackle them. At the same time, we are still going to rely on the support of the everyday police officer working on the street. We need to recognise those who have given long service and the skills they need.

In closing, the noble Lords’ recommendations are valuable and welcome, and I thank them for their assistance. I assure the House that we will reflect on the recommendations and bring back a coherent plan of action.

Rochdale Grooming Gang: Offender Deportation

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Wednesday 8th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Cameron of Lochiel (Con)]

My Lords, when this Urgent Question was asked by my honourable friend Katie Lam in the other place on Monday, the Minister responding, Alex Norris, said:

“I could not be clearer that all options are on the table at this stage”.—[Official Report, Commons, 6/7/26; col. 28.]


With respect, the only option that should be on the table is the deportation of Shabir Ahmed. There is no justification whatever for him to remain in the country after the despicable crimes he has committed. If the Government say that they cannot deport him because of the law then they must change the law. The Opposition have said we will support that change, so why will the Government not commit to bringing forward the necessary amendment to the Immigration Act 1971 as a matter of urgency?

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

The crimes which led to the imprisonment of the individual concerned were despicable and horrendous. I say again to the noble Lord that we are urgently looking at these matters and will bring potential urgent action on them. We are examining this in detail and nothing is ruled out at all. I will keep the noble Lord updated on this matter. It is not acceptable that this individual is protected. For information, in the last 12 months we have deported 187 foreign national offenders for rape offences and 392 foreign national offenders for sexual offences. However, as the noble Lord mentioned, the 1971 Act places a restriction on this individual, and we are urgently examining that issue.

[Baroness Doocey (LD)]

My Lords, this case arises from one of the most despicable and notorious failures of local agencies to protect local vulnerable girls. Can the Minister tell the House what specific lessons have been learned from the original Rochdale investigation? How have those lessons now been built into national policing guidance on grooming gangs? How will the Minister ensure that the guidance on grooming gangs now with police will be applied consistently across the UK?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Baroness. Self-evidently, there are a number of lessons to be learned. That is why we have established the grooming gangs inquiry, currently operating under the auspices of the noble Baroness, Lady Longfield. There are a number of lessons to be learned on this matter. We want to ensure that we take action to give guidance to the police and help prevent future victims. In this case, it should be remembered that of the individuals who were participating in this grooming gang, Mr Ahmed was deprived of his citizenship in 2016, and of the eight gang members in total one was deported to Afghanistan and one was deported to Pakistan, two are British and therefore exempt from deportation but have faced the penalty of prison, one left the UK last year clandestinely, and the final three have been deprived of their British citizenship and have deportation orders in place. We are working speedily to make sure that those individuals face further justice.

[Baroness Foster of Oxton (Con)]

My Lords, I wholly agree with the point that has been raised around this case. It truly is a despicable case. Yesterday in the Chamber, I raised comments regarding the Government’s position on early release. This is not in isolation. Thousands of victims—women and young girls—are now left in the most awful situation due to the proposals of this Government on early release. Can the Minister tell us, yes or no, whether rapists will be part of the early release scheme that the Government are about to bring in?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I told the noble Baroness yesterday, but will repeat it today, that those who are convicted of serious offences will not be considered under the early release scheme. I could not have been clearer yesterday and cannot be clearer today. The early release scheme details will be brought forward in due course. It is the intention of the Government to protect the public while dealing with a prisoner backlog in prisons, which, with due respect to the noble Baroness, lies at the door of the previous Conservative Government.

[Lord Harris of Haringey (Lab)]

My Lords, the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, talked about lessons learned from the original case, but are there lessons to be learned about the release process and the way in which this individual’s immigration status was flagged up to the authorities at an early stage? I have the impression that the Government were slightly blindsided by this case. Frankly, that should not have been the case. It should have been clear earlier on from the file which no doubt follows the individual around the prison system.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

My noble friend asks me about the individual’s management within the prison system, which is a Ministry of Justice responsibility. The individual is on the sex offenders register for life, has been ordered to stay away from victims, is banned from contact with any child or young person, faces strict curfews and restriction zones, and is required to wear an electronic tag. Should he breach his conditions, he will be immediately returned to prison. As I have said in response to other questions, we are urgently examining all options. Nothing is ruled out in the response regarding the deportation. Sadly, the deportation issue relates to the 1971 Act, which was a long time ago, under the Government of Ted Heath. There are Members in this House—I am looking at one now—who were Members of Parliament at that time. It is a long time ago, but we need to examine how we ensure that individuals who have been convicted and face deportation do face the consequences of their actions.

[Lord Jackson of Peterborough (Con)]

My Lords, the Minister has been commendably robust and consistent on this. There are reports in the media today that the Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, is bringing forward legislation. Can he be more precise on the expected timescale to expedite that legislation? Is his department having discussions with the Government of Pakistan on the issuance of visas? The Pakistani Government have issued a number of, frankly, unnecessarily intemperate comments about colonialism over what is essentially one of their own citizens.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

We are in discussion with the Pakistan Government at all times. I hope that the noble Lord and the House understand that we keep all options under review and will take whatever action is required to ensure that we deal with this issue. I am not in a position today to answer the points that he has mentioned, but can reaffirm that we keep all options under review.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, it appears that the said gentleman, Shabir Ahmed, has ripped up his Pakistan passport and claims to be without a state at the moment. That is an issue that has not yet been addressed. The issue of the law, the Immigration Act 1971, could simply be addressed in the Government’s legislation before both Houses. Is that not an option?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am going to sound like a broken record: we keep all options under review. If the noble Baroness will listen to what I have said, we keep all options under review and will take whatever action is required. I cannot further update the House at this moment, except to say that point.

[Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (LD)]

My Lords, at lot of the attention at the moment is rightly on Shabir Ahmed, but there are two other individuals who are facing deportation. Is the Minister able to update the House on whether there are any obstacles to their deportation from this country? Are they in a similar situation to Shabir Ahmed or is it more straightforward?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

If it were straightforward, we would have, as the noble Lord will know, dealt with the matter in a way that met the objectives that the House is pressing me to meet. There are three British citizens who have had their citizenship deprived. They have deportations in place and we are in discussions with the authorities in Pakistan to make sure that they can be deported. We will keep all options under review, to make sure that we achieve that objective. If the House will bear with me, that is as far as I can go today, but I hope the House has heard the meaning behind the words that I am saying.

[Lord Sentamu (CB)]

My Lords, does the Minister agree that a country that prides itself on keeping the rule of law and on the fact that nobody is above the law cannot hastily amend legislation which goes back to 1971? Such a country has to look at all the processes. Does he agree that it is time that he and the Attorney-General appoint somebody to go through all old legislation where we find ourselves caught up because it is the law?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful for the noble and right reverend Lord’s comments. The legislation in 1971 was put in place for a proper purpose, and that was to secure the rights of Commonwealth citizens to remain in the United Kingdom. That is a positive purpose. Part of the challenge for the Windrush generation has been a consequence of the avoidance of dealing with that in a proper way. That does not mean to say that, ultimately, the Government cannot then examine legislation when serious offences have occurred, such as those for which Mr Ahmed has been imprisoned. If that legislation is causing challenges in how we can deal with that individual, we need to examine those issues. As I have said to the noble Lords opposite, we are keeping all those matters under review. I will report back to the House as soon as possible on any outcome of that review.

Safe Refugee Routes for Students

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Wednesday 8th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Royall of Blaisdon]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what recent progress they have made towards developing safe refugee routes for students from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar and Sudan.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

My Lords, the Government committed to three new safe and legal routes in the Restoring Order and Control Statement. The Home Secretary announced that the refugee study route will be open this autumn, with arrivals in autumn 2027. Officials are working closely with stakeholders to design the new routes to ensure that they are both safe and controlled, and further information will be set out in due course.

[Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Lab)]

My Lords, I am delighted to hear that there is progress and that the Government are determined that the scheme should be in operation by the next academic year. However, I ask my noble friend for his assurance that those students who might be able to take up the offer being provided by the Government, and who meet the criteria and have scholarships, will know that they will be able to take up the places by 2027. Further, is the Home Office consulting with UUK to ensure that universities are not overburdened by whatever scheme is put in place?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

We intend to set out details of the scheme very shortly, which will, hopefully, provide clarity on what the Government are intending to do with the safe and legal routes. As my noble friend said, it is also important that the universities themselves are involved in, and at least have some discussion with the Government on, the implementation and design of the scheme. I will feed that back to colleagues who are dealing with this directly.

[Lord German (LD)]

My Lords, I declare an interest that I am supported by RAMP. What advice would the Minister give to Afra Elmahdi, a cancer specialist from war-torn Sudan who has secured a master’s place to do cancer science research at Oxford University? That post, that job, that relationship, has ended. What message would the Minister send to her? She seeks to be able to diagnose cancer more swiftly in a country that is torn apart by civil war.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

As I as have said, the Government are examining safe and legal routes. However, at the moment, we have temporarily suspended the issuing of visas to those from Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar and Sudan. We have done that because there has been an increase of over 470% from 2021 levels, and over a third of asylum seekers have previously entered the UK on a visa. We are trying to put safe and legal routes in place. We will look at that scheme, and the noble Lord and others will be able to facilitate that scheme, with effect from autumn next year.

[Lord Davies of Gower (Con)]

My Lords, the Government have recently announced that they will allow communities to sponsor refugees on new asylum routes. Given that we had 93,525 people claiming asylum in the United Kingdom in the year ending March 2026, can the Minister tell the House how the Government can be contemplating increasing this number even further?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

If the noble Lord does not want the Government to meet their obligations on asylum, he should say so. The Government are about trying to meet our international obligations, which we are trying to ensure that we do through this scheme, as the Home Secretary announced in a press conference on 26 June, by giving refugees study and named sponsorship routes, which will be open to applications from lead sponsors in the autumn. That will put real guidelines around asylum applications. It is important that people have sponsorship and places to go, including at university, but it is also important that we meet our international obligations and do not have the abuse of the system that, sadly—dare I say it?—occurred under the Government opposite.

[Baroness Gohir (CB)]

My Lords, first the Taliban prevented Afghan females studying and now the Home Office are preventing them studying. Why have the Government not given them an exemption, given that Afghan female students make up a tiny proportion of all international students, to allow them to study in this country?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

As I have said, the Government have decided to put a brake on all applications from nationals of Afghanistan, Cameroon, Myanmar and Sudan. The brake is not intended to be permanent; it will be lifted when the Government consider it appropriate to do so. In the meantime, we are trying to put in place proper safe and legal routes for individuals such as those mentioned by the noble Baroness to be able to come to the United Kingdom with sponsorship in a proper and effective way. That brake is temporary, but it has been put in place for an important reason that I have to report to the House today.

[Lord Isaac (Lab)]

My Lords, I reinforce the point about the devastating impact on refugee students of the introduction of the visa brake. I am really pleased to hear the assurances from my noble friend the Minister that the brake is only temporary and that there will now be an opportunity for sponsorship from universities. I declare an interest as provost of Worcester College, Oxford. Can my noble friend give an assurance that clever refugee students from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Sudan and Cameroon will be able to come to the UK, study and return to their countries as future leaders?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

That is really important. My noble friend will know that one of the great things the UK has is soft power through the university sector. People will go back to their countries from United Kingdom universities to be business and political leaders. The brake is in place now, but we are looking at how we design the scheme to ensure that we have safe and legal routes from next year for the type of sponsorship that my noble friend mentions. Further discussion will be undertaken by the Home Secretary very shortly, and I would welcome any contribution he wants to make to that.

[Lord Clarke of Nottingham (Con)]

My Lords, given the interpretation that British courts and tribunals have put on the UN and European conventions in recent years, I assume that the entire population of places such as Sudan and Somalia would qualify for asylum and be granted it if they could get their feet on to British soil. Would the Government not prefer to tackle this legal problem, get our asylum rules back to common sense and consider putting a cap on the total numbers that our public services and society can absorb before opening up more safe and legal routes for people to come from these and other countries?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Lord makes an important point. He will know that I repeated a Statement from the Home Secretary last November on controlling the very issues he mentions. As announced in the King’s gracious Speech earlier this year, there will be an immigration Bill to put into effect some of the issues covered in that Statement on asylum. I suggest that the noble Lord will have a great contribution to make in ensuring that that Bill leaves both Houses of Parliament in a form that meets the objectives he has set out and the Government’s objectives to have safe and legal routes at the same time as putting some control into the system in an effective way. We are cognisant of European human rights issues and are reflecting on them as part of the legislative programme.

[The Lord Bishop of Winchester]

My Lords, if I may broaden the scope of the Question, given that the recent conflict has not led to any evident improvement in the situation facing ordinary Iranians, what assessment have His Majesty’s Government made of the availability of safe and legal routes for Iranian nationals? I am thinking in particular of members of Iran’s persecuted and vulnerable religious minorities, including Christian converts, Bahá’ís, Sunni and Sufi Muslims.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The right reverend Prelate puts his finger on an important point. The scheme that I have outlined to the House is one that the Government are currently developing. We intend to announce further details of the scheme, and we have given a date for when it will be operational. I am happy to receive representations from the right reverend Prelate and his colleagues on how we implement that scheme for countries outside the four that are in the original Question from my noble friend.

[Lord Hussain (LD)]

My Lords, I hear what the Minister said about setting temporary bars for students from certain countries. However, in relation to the students who belong to the families of Afghan interpreters who are stranded in Pakistan, is there a special provision for the children of the interpreters who worked with our forces in very difficult circumstances?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

Again, the Government will look at all cases on an individual basis. I am aware of the issue, but I am not aware in relation to where the Government currently examine that aspect of policy. If the noble Lord will allow me, I will write to him on the specific issue of interpreters in Pakistan. Where there are legitimate claims for asylum, they will be considered under existing policies and, with the changes we are proposing, under future policy as well.

[Lord Bellingham (Con)]

I strongly support what the Government are trying to do here. The Minister will be aware of my long-standing interest in Sudan, and I agree with what he said. There are many Sudanese students who have contributed a great deal to our society and, every time I go to Sudan, I meet many people who have been to our universities and are now in positions of considerable authority in Sudan. If students come here on the safe refugee route, the key point is that they should be returned to their home country if that country then enters a period of stability at the end of their course.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

On all those aspects, the intention is to allow individuals to benefit from the safe and legal route that gives them the opportunity to study, work or bring a required skill to the United Kingdom. However, it is also important that we do not have a brain drain, or individuals leaving but not returning to their countries when possible. The noble Lords’ points are extremely important. In the scheme we are designing, we are trying to ensure that there are sponsors who have responsibility for the individuals who come to this country and that, ultimately, they return to their home countries to use the benefits they have learned in the United Kingdom to improve their home countries.

Drugging and Sexual Assault of Women

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hazarika]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the findings by the National Crime Agency, published on 2 July, regarding an international network of men who are drugging and sexually assaulting women; and what steps they intend to take as a result.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

Sexual violence has a devastating impact on victims, and the accounts of drug-facilitated sexual offences are deeply concerning. However, the law is clear: this behaviour is criminal. The Government will relentlessly pursue perpetrators who target women, whether online or offline, and the Home Office is funding a new pilot of undercover police officers to target perpetrators using the internet to facilitate violence against women and girls.

[Baroness Hazarika (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for his Answer. We were all appalled by the case of the mass rape committed against Gisèle Pelicot in France, but sadly, this is not an isolated case. The reports—and I pay tribute to the National Crime Agency—have revealed that there are vast online communities of men, including here in the United Kingdom, who are getting together online, encouraging each other to drug their female partners, either rape them themselves or have them gang-raped, and then circulate the footage online. These shocking crimes are being done to women in their own bedrooms, in their own homes, by their long-term partners or husbands who they trusted and thought would love, cherish and protect them, and all this behaviour is being organised and facilitated by unregulated online platforms. Can my noble friend tell us what has been done to force all tech companies and internet services, and regulators such as Ofcom, to proactively detect and stop this kind of heinous activity? Will he acknowledge that we are now in a global epidemic of violence against women and girls, and that much of it is technology-fuelled?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

My noble friend is right. As I have said already, these actions are criminal in United Kingdom and there is a duty on tech platforms to take down criminal activity or face severe fines. I also say to my noble friend that the Government are supporting Project Medusa, a collaborative effort between the National Crime Agency and German, Brazilian, Canadian, French, Hungarian, Dutch, Spanish and United States agencies and Europol to ensure that we break these gangs at source, take them down and pursue them for their criminal activity.

[Baroness Hussein-Ece (LD)]

My Lords, as has just been outlined by the noble Baroness, drug-facilitated sexual assault appears to be a global phenomenon which is flourishing in the dark parts of the internet. One website with this content, with millions of visitors, had more than 20,000 videos, with hundreds of thousands of views, of this so-called “sleep content”—that is, women who are drugged and sexually assaulted. So I am pleased to hear the Minister’s response. So far, the national response to DFSA, including monitoring, reporting, investigating and prosecuting, has been described as inadequate. So will the Minister give an assurance that addressing these horrifying crimes must be a priority to protect women’s fundamental rights, including challenging online platforms and apps hosting DFSA content which actively exploit regulatory loopholes?

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful for the support from the noble Baroness. As I say, these acts are criminal. Under the Online Safety Act, in-scope platforms should have systems in place to prevent users encountering illegal material and to swiftly remove it. The Online Safety Act gives Ofcom significant powers to fine companies up to 10% of their global revenue and to block services in the United Kingdom entirely. As I mentioned, the Home Office is funding undercover police officers to test those systems and, as I also mentioned, we are co-operating internationally to make sure that this is an international effort. I should also say to the noble Baroness that, over the past 18 months, prosecutions of sexual offences are up, convictions are up, charges are up and police reporting is up.

[Baroness Gohir (CB)]

My Lords, can the Minister tell us when the Government will have a public awareness-raising campaign to help women recognise and spot the signs and encourage them to report this type of abuse?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Baroness makes a very important point and I pay tribute to the bravery of the women who have come forward on this issue. It takes an awful lot to do so, particularly when sometimes they have not been aware of the fact that they have been subject to criminal activity. I assure all women in the United Kingdom that, if they now bring these matters forward, the police, the prosecuting authorities and the Home Office take these matters seriously and will pursue the perpetrators of these offences. They can do so in confidence and with the assurance that we will take these matters forward.

[Baroness McIntosh of Pickering (Con)]

My Lords, does the noble Lord share my concern that one of the main perpetrators in the Rochdale grooming gangs has been eligible for early release and is not immediately set for deportation? What message is that giving to those very real victims who suffered huge deprivation in the grooming gang scandal that this man is going to be able to walk free?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The individual concerned committed horrendous crimes. I give the noble Baroness an assurance, and I hope she can understand what I say, that the nature of the offending in this case means that we take this matter very seriously and we are exploring all options now to ensure that we can examine how we respond to that particular case.

[Lord Davies of Gower (Con)]

My Lords, it is welcome that the National Crime Agency has investigated these appalling events, and I hope the perpetrators face the full force of the law. However, does the Minister accept that the NCA’s job of investigating and preventing organised sexual crime is going to be made significantly harder when the Government release thousands of rapists and child groomers from prison? Of course, the Government promised to build new prisons, but we are two years in with no sign of them yet.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

There are some times when my gob is smacked, and this is one of those occasions. The Conservative Government caused the backlog in prisoners and the failure of prisons being built, which has led to the backlog that we currently have in our prison system. I say to the noble Lord that we are ensuring that we put public safety at the heart of our reforms and that prisoners judged the most dangerous by the courts are excluded from early release. Offenders of the particular type he mentioned will not be early-released in that way; he should have known that when he asked that question.

[Baroness Bennett of Manor Castle (GP)]

My Lords, returning to the issue raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Hazarika, about the National Crime Agency findings, I draw on a statement today from the CEO of Rape Crisis England & Wales, which notes that many women will be wondering whether they were affected and, quite rightly, directs them to Rape Crisis’s 24/7 support line, whether they fear the events may have been recent or years ago. This has the potential to significantly increase demand for that service and other relevant services. Are the Government prepared to put more resources in to support victims and those who fear they may have been victims?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

We have put an additional £13.9 million into the National Centre for Violence Against Women and Girls, and we want to ensure that measures are brought forward so people can respond and bring forward reporting on those issues. We have also put a range of other measures in place which I think are important, including domestic abuse protection orders. The noble Baroness makes an important point. Ultimately, I want individuals who have been victims of crime, or even think they have been victims of crime, to report them and to be taken seriously. As I mentioned in an earlier answer, every indicator at the moment in terms of prosecutions, convictions, reports and police action is up over the past 18 months.

[Baroness Foster of Oxton (Con)]

My Lords, I think the Minister, who I respect very much, may not be quite correct. One of his colleagues who is a Home Office Minister was interviewed on Sunday—I think it was by Laura Kuenssberg, or it was on GB News—and was asked directly whether rapists were going to be released early from prison. The Minister did not answer the question. He did not deny the fact. He just went into the normal verbal criticism of the last Tory Government. Perhaps the Minister could check out what he has said to this House today, because clearly, there appears to be a conflict between Ministers in the Home Office.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am speaking on behalf of the Home Office at this Dispatch Box and I say to the noble Baroness that the prisoners judged the most dangerous by the courts are excluded from being released early. That is the Home Office’s position.

[Lord Mohammed of Tinsley (LD)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the response he gave, particularly around one of the groomers from Rochdale, and I can tell him personally that I will support whatever action he takes to get evil men such as him out of this country, because they do not belong here. For me, there is a culture here in terms of certain types of men, from all backgrounds, who just do not value women any more, whether they are married to them or in a relationship. What work can we do from a youth point of view, because some of these influencers, people such as Tate, are having a huge influence on how our young people look towards and value women?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Lord makes an extremely important point. It is very important that young men from early school age are supported to ensure that they respect female members of our society in every way, shape and form. I take great exception to those online influencers who drive an agenda that has misogyny at its heart. Again, I think that is a long-term issue. I welcome constructive engagements and suggestions on that, but it is a systemic problem that we need to address in order to allow women to have the freedom to live their lives free from misogyny and its consequences, which include the sexual offences that we have dealt with today.

Registration of Births and Deaths (England and Wales) (Specified Requirements) Regulations 2026

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Grand Committee

Moved by

[Lord Hanson of Flint]

That the Grand Committee do consider the Registration of Births and Deaths (England and Wales) (Specified Requirements) Regulations 2026.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

My Lords, these regulations made under Section 38B of the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 specify the requirements that a person will need to meet when registering a birth, stillbirth or death. The regulations will replace the requirement for a person to sign the register with a “wet” signature with specified requirements which, when taken together, will be treated as signing the register. This will support the move to an electronic register for the registration of births and deaths.

This instrument represents an important and necessary step in modernising the system of civil registration in England and Wales. The current framework, which requires individuals to attend a register office and physically sign a paper register, has remained unchanged for generations. While it has provided a reliable foundation for recording these vital life events, it no longer reflects the opportunities offered by modern technology nor the expectations of people engaging with public services in the 21st century.

These regulations will support the transition to a fully electronic register by replacing the traditional requirement for a handwritten signature with a new framework based on clearly specified legal requirements. At the heart of this approach is a simple but crucial principle: individuals must formally declare that the information they provide is true to the best of their knowledge and belief. This declaration will ensure that personal accountability is preserved even as the system moves away from a paper-based process.

In addition, the regulations introduce appropriate and proportionate safeguards to verify identity when registering a birth. In cases where identity assurance is required, individuals must either use a recognised digital identity verification service or provide documentary evidence to the registrar. This ensures that the integrity of the registration process is maintained, while allowing for greater flexibility in how people engage with the service.

The regulations, as set out in detail, give the types of documents that may be used to establish identity, which include well-known and trusted documents such as passports, biometric immigration documents, travel documents and photo driving licences. In circumstances where not a single document of this kind is available, individuals may provide two supporting documents, such as utility bills, bank or building society statements or official correspondence issued by government bodies. The approach is deliberately balanced. It recognises that while robust identity assurance is essential to protect the accuracy of vital records, there must also be flexibility to accommodate the diverse circumstances of the population. By offering both digital and documentary routes, the regulations promote inclusion, ensuring that individuals are not disadvantaged by their access to technology or documentation. The regulations provide clarity for both registrars and the public.

Crucially, the legal effect of registration is preserved in full. Where a person complies with the specified requirements, they are to be treated in law as having signed the register and, where relevant, as having done so in the presence of the registrar. This ensures continuity and legal certainty, while enabling the practical benefits of an electronic system to be realised.

The benefits of this reform are clear. Moving to an electronic register will improve efficiency within registration services, reduce reliance on paper processes and better align civil registration with wider government digital strategies. It will also provide greater convenience for the public, giving more flexible ways to provide information in the future to complete registrations.

At the same time, and this is important, these regulations will maintain the high standards of accuracy and trust that are fundamental to the registration system. Birth, stillbirth and death records underpin legal identity, public administration and the collection of vital statistics. It is therefore essential that any change to the system continues to safeguard the reliability of these records. The requirements for declaration and identity verification ensure that these standards are upheld.

I hope it is reassuring, in case there are any questions, if I provide clear assurance that the move to an electronic register is underpinned by robust and comprehensive cyber security arrangements. The systems supporting digital registration are designed and operated in accordance with National Cyber Security Centre guidance and wider Cabinet Office security standards, ensuring that personal data is protected against unauthorised access, loss or misuse. This includes the use of secure authentication, encryption of sensitive information and continuous monitoring to detect and respond to potential threats.

In addition, the identity assurance elements of the system align with the Government Digital Service’s good practice guide 45, ensuring that identity verification processes are both secure and proportionate. Taken together, these measures reflect the Government’s firm commitment to safeguarding the integrity of vital records and maintaining public trust as we modernise civil registration. The instrument will deliver a measured and forward-looking reform. It retains the core principles of accountability and integrity that have long underpinned civil registration, while enabling the system to operate effectively in a modern, digital context.

Finally, I place on record my thanks to the officials who have spent many years in gestation of this modernising approach. I thank them for their efforts and continuing support. I beg to move.

[Viscount Stansgate (Lab)]

My Lords, I do not intend to speak for long at all. Like other Members present here today, I have registered births, deaths and just the one marriage, so far. Of course, it is a very important thing to do. I fully understand my noble friend’s argument that we must move, in the 21st century, to enable these things to be done digitally. A couple of years ago I helped to pilot on to the statute book a Private Member’s Bill to provide a digital version of the lasting power of attorney to avoid the hundreds of pages involved in producing it by a normal, old-fashioned method.

I want to raise two quick points. First, is it in fact being suggested by my noble friend that in the future these things will be done entirely online and that no person will need to go to their local authority to register a birth, marriage or death? Secondly, and he referred to the cyber security aspects of this, it is terribly important. The damage that would be caused were someone to be able to intervene and change the digital record of a birth or a death would have incalculable consequences. I hope that those are two reasonable points to mention to my noble friend.

--- Later in debate ---

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to noble Lords for their contributions. I give what I hope is an assurance to my noble friend Lord Stansgate. Provision for online services will be available next year, but we are taking a staged approach: we are undertaking deaths online first, and births and stillbirths will come later. We are also introducing the provision to register deaths by telephone from November this year. However, there will still be an option to attend in person and, as the new system is being developed, that option will always remain. I hope that reassures my noble friend.

I would also reassure my noble friend on cyber security, which we take very seriously. These are important matters that are extremely important for individuals to have confidence. In my introductory remarks, I indicated that cyber security is up to the standards of all our developments in government. There are always challenges and people trying to get information, and there will always be potential attacks, but we are confident that the provisions in place are up to the standard that the Government expect for cyber security, for the reasons I outlined in my opening remarks.

The noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Rolfe, asked about whether a burial can still go ahead while an appeal on the cause of death is being heard, which is an important question. Obviously, it is a very difficult time for anybody when a death occurs, and that is an added complication, so I understand why she has raised this. If a medical examiner discusses the case with the certifying doctor, the cause of death can be amended if evidence is available to support this. Alternatively, the case could be referred to the coroner; once the coroner has released the body, this does not necessarily require the cause of death to be established.

Again, looking at the advice—I was aware that the noble Baroness would raise this—my understanding is that, under the recently introduced medical examiner scheme, a disposal document can be issued only upon receipt of a completed medical certificate of cause of death. The medical examiner has a duty to discuss the cause of death with the next of kin. The medical examiner issued a report yesterday confirming that medical examiner officers in both England and Wales report that an interaction with the next of kin took place in 97% of cases. Feedback received from the medical examiner confirms that the overwhelming number of cases were positive and that, if there are particular difficulties, the medical examiner and others will look at those. If the noble Baroness wants to write privately with the specific details of the case, outside the Committee, I will certainly look into it, because potentially some of the issues she raised may well have been due to misinformation rather than any malpractice. If she writes, I will look at the case as a whole.

With regard to the concerns raised by the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, I think he is referring to the use of One Login, the Government’s approved digital verification service, which will be used for those using an online system. People will be required as of now to use the Government-approved digital verification when registering online. That will be similar to other forms of Government Gateway that are used.

The noble Lord also mentioned cyber security. As I said to my noble friend Lord Stansgate, as a Government we take that issue very seriously. We believe that this meets the standards. As I said to my noble friend, there will be opportunities to use the telephone and do it in person, as well as to do it online. However, the whole purpose of the regulations is to allow that online push for greater efficiency to continue. I hope the noble Lord is content with those comments. If there are further issues, I will look at what he has said and drop him a helpful letter, unless he wishes to raise any further issues now.

[Lord Davies of Gower (Con)]

I have no further issues to raise, but I will make a comment. I have used the government verification system recently, and it is an absolute nightmare. If nothing else, I wish they could make it a lot easier, because you almost have to have a degree in mathematics to use it.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I confess that the education I had in maths did not even really reach O-level standard, but I managed to use it. I can never remember the verification numbers or reference numbers that I have, and that is always difficult, but that is a common problem in every aspect of modern digital life. I cannot remember passwords and other things, so I tend to write them down, which then makes them vulnerable to misuse. It is very difficult—I accept that—but, fortunately, nobody knows where I have written down my verification for the government log in except me, so I think I am safe.

The Government’s intention is to make this type of activity as simple as possible for people. When we had Covid, I used the telephone service when a close relative of mine died and I had to report the death. I found the telephone service 100% efficient and useful. In fact, it saved me a journey from where my mum died into the centre of Liverpool to register the death at a time of great distress. It was much easier to do that on the phone, in the comfort of my own home, rather than having to go along to a city-centre office to do it. As my noble friend Lord Stansgate said, it is still possible to do that, but I think the movement to online, digital and telephone will help the consumer, which is what we should be about, and improve efficiency. I commend the regulations to the Committee.

Motion agreed.

Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Tuesday 7th July 2026 Grand Committee

Moved by

[Lord Hanson of Flint]

That the Grand Committee do consider the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2026.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

My Lords, this order seeks to amend the definition of “ninja sword” in the list of prohibited offensive weapons contained in the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988.

I will briefly set out the context. Noble Lords will recognise the campaigning by the family of Ronan Kanda, who was just 16 when he was fatally stabbed in 2022, following which there was a Labour government manifesto commitment to ban ninja swords. In 2024, we held a public consultation to seek views from the public and a range of interested stakeholders on the draft definition of a ninja sword. Ninja swords are defined as a bladed article with a blade between 14 inches and 24 inches in length, with one straight cutting edge and a tanto-style point. This length was chosen in order to exclude knives and tools designed for legitimate purposes, such as many kitchen knives and other types of knives.

In order to be within scope of the ban, the article should also have the features specified in paragraph 1(u) of the Schedule to the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) Order 1988, namely: a primary cutting edge, a secondary cutting edge and a blunt spine, with either a tanto-style point or a reverse-tanto style point. These terms are further defined in the detail of the legislation.

We analysed the consultation responses and introduced legislation as per the manifesto on ninja swords, which were prohibited from 1 August 2025. The Government recently became aware that the wording of the legislation does not correctly describe the length of the secondary straight cutting edge of a ninja sword as intended. The order before the Committee today seeks to rectify that and align the legislation with the original intention.

To be clear to noble Lords, this amendment is a technical clarification to existing secondary legislation banning ninja swords, and although the amendment to the definition widens the scope of the current wording, it does not introduce new offences, bring any ninja swords out of scope or impose any additional requirements on the public. The detail is as follows: under Section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, it is an offence to possess, import, manufacture, sell, hire, offer for sale or hire, expose or possess for the purposes of sale or hire a weapon specified in an order made under that section.

The current legislation contains a detailed description of the tanto-style or reverse tanto-style point of the sword. It may be helpful if I just remind noble Lords of that legislation, which states that

“a secondary straight cutting edge is a cutting edge … which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and … is no more than 5% longer or shorter than the width of the blade immediately after the handle”.

The reference to “5%” is incorrect and limits the scope of what size of tip falls under the legislation. We are therefore proposing to use this order-making power in Section 141(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to amend the definition of a secondary straight cutting edge to

“a cutting edge … which forms an angle with the primary straight cutting edge and the spine, and … is no more than 105% longer than the width of the blade immediately after the handle”.

That correction will allow the legislation to function as intended and remove any ambiguity about the swords which fall within the scope of the definition. We have also included an additional diagram in the explanatory notes to make the definition easier to understand.

To conclude, we have a mission to halve knife crime in a decade, and it is essential that we stop potentially dangerous weapons such as ninja swords getting into the wrong hands. This is a necessary clarification, and the order will aid both the Government and the police in that vital effort. I commend it to the Committee.

[Lord Davies of Gower (Con)]

My Lords, the order has been brought before Parliament to correct an error in a previous piece of secondary legislation—the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Offensive Weapons) (Amendment, Surrender and Compensation) (England and Wales) Order 2025—which we debated on 5 June 2025. As the Minister said, the previous order banned so-called ninja swords under the powers in Section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. I supported that measure at the time, and I still do.

Knife crime remains one of the toughest and most serious challenges in policing, and its effects weigh heavily on communities up and down the country. However, since passing the order, the police have raised issues with the definition of the characteristics of the weapon in question. The order stated that, for an article to be considered a ninja sword, it had to have a primary cutting edge, a secondary cutting edge, a blunt spine and a tanto-style point or a reverse tanto-style point. The original order defined the secondary cutting edge as being a cutting edge which

“is no more than 5% longer or shorter than the width of the blade immediately after the handle”.

As the Minister said, the police have raised an issue with that definition, and it appears that the Home Office was mistaken to use the 5% threshold in the original order. The order before us today amends that definition to 105%.

As I supported the ban on ninja swords and this piece of legislation corrects the error in the definition, I therefore support this order today. It is a welcome move, as the Government have listened to concerns from the police and acted swiftly to rectify the mistake.

It will come as no surprise to the Minister that I cannot let the moment pass without asking: how did this happen? How did the Home Office not realise when it was drafting the order last year that the definition it had used for the secondary cutting edge was incorrect? Did officials consult the police or did the Home Office engage weapons specialists? If so, how did no one realise the error in the definition? I look forward to the answers from the Minister.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Davies of Gower, for his broad support for the original and existing orders. I am indebted to him for his contribution to this debate.

In 2024, the Government consulted on new legislative proposals on ninja swords, which were agreed last year, as the noble Lord said. We included the proposed definition that was in the order last year and liaised directly with all stakeholders. At the time, there was no indication from any of them, including the police, that we needed to revisit the definition. They all supported it. The consultation included wide-ranging discussions, and there was no indication that the legal definition would not function as intended.

This happened only after the police began to collect the knives that had been surrendered. There were 3,942 knives surrendered, including 142 weapons where compensation was not claimed. A total of 3,570 knives and weapons were surrendered through an extended surrender scheme. The police became aware of the issues at that time and raised them with the Government. Once the police identified the error, we acted immediately to correct the wording and ensure that the definition functions correctly to outlaw these weapons.

We have passed legislation on ninja swords—a type of sword that we are aware has been used for crimes. We will keep the legislation under review, but if it was an error then it was one made by everyone involved in the consultation. My job is to make sure that we rectify that, which we have done today, by bringing this order before the Committee.

Motion agreed.

Counterterrorism: AI and Facial Recognition

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Wednesday 1st July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Davidson of Glen Clova]

To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of whether the current legal architecture permits the appropriate use of AI and live facial recognition for counterterrorism purposes.

[The Minister of State, Home Office (Lord Hanson of Flint) (Lab)]

The current legal architecture allows effective use of these technologies, but the Government continue to keep legislation under regular review as threats evolve. The Government are investing a record £141 million in AI technology and automation, including over £11 million on 40 new live facial recognition units. The police reform Bill will complement this by introducing clearer rules and independent oversight for facial recognition, ensuring that its use remains lawful, proportionate and responsible.

[Lord Davidson of Glen Clova (Lab)]

I thank my noble friend for his Answer. The Home Office consultation was a welcome recognition of the gaps in the current statutory framework in this area. I welcome the notion that there will be a development of legislation, particularly the police reform Bill, which covers these important technologies. On the proposed legislation, will there be support for behavioural analytics in relation to counterterrorism? I ask because that is a very important tool.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful to my noble and learned friend for his question. What we are trying to do in the police reform Bill is respond to the consultation he has mentioned, which closed a few weeks back. We are currently analysing the responses to that consultation, and the intention is to put in place a legal framework that covers all aspects of facial recognition technology, so that there is proper governance, proper accountability, and a clear understanding of what, where and how facial recognition technology can be used. I will ensure that when the Bill is brought forward, my noble and learned friend has an opportunity to reflect on the points that he has made today.

[Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate (Con)]

My Lords, while I welcome the Government’s approach to this, with the postponement of the EU-UK summit, which was to discuss security issues, from 22 July to another date, I am all the more concerned that the re-establishment of our links to SIS II, the information system which gives real-time information on movements of terrorists around Europe, will now be put off as well. I wonder whether the Minister will update us on what we are doing to try to get ourselves back into what is undoubtedly the best means of dealing with terrorists.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Lord knows my clear view on this matter: we have to have a very constructive relationship with Europe; the things that we lost due to the Brexit withdrawal need to be examined in detail on the criminal justice front; it is in Europe’s and United Kingdom’s interests to have better access and understanding of who goes where, when and why; and it is the objective of the Government to try to help the European Union and to receive benefits. The summit that was planned for July has been postponed for reasons that are self-evident—because of a change of Prime Minister—but the objective of the Government remains the same.

[Lord Anderson of Ipswich (CB)]

My Lords, artificial intelligence chatbots are already engaged in skilfully targeted radicalisation. They may even be used in attack planning, as in the case of the Windsor Castle crossbow attacker, who was thwarted, fortunately, in his ambition to kill Her late Majesty but was assisted and encouraged throughout by his online “girlfriend”, Sarai. The Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation has suggested that we may need laws against the creation and deployment of computer programs that can be used for such malign purposes. Could the Minister update us as to what the Government are going to do about it?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

I am grateful as always for the expertise that the noble Lord brings to this issue. The independent reviewer did indeed consider, in his annual report, the impact of generative AI on terrorism-related activity. The report concluded that, where AI is intended to be used for terrorist purposes, existing terrorism legislation generally provides sufficient coverage. Nevertheless, we are continuing to look at that. It is an important issue. As the noble Lord knows from our long discussions in the last few days, we have a security Bill and a police reform Bill coming up. We keep those matters under review and, obviously, it is a very fast-moving situation. We need to be ahead of the game for the reasons the noble Lord has mentioned.

[Baroness Doocey (LD)]

My Lords, the Government have committed substantial resources to live facial recognition technology, but, at present, the police authorisation makes no distinction between the technology being deployed on the high street and for counterterrorism purposes. Will the Minister confirm that the forthcoming framework will establish a distinct statutory authorisation regime for counterterrorism purposes so that we are not leaving both of them to inadequate police superintendent authorisation, as we are at the moment?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

The noble Baroness makes a valid point about the difference between terrorism and what I will term other crime. As she knows, facial recognition technology is sometimes used for things such as identifying missing persons who have not been involved in crime at all. There needs to be a clear framework for this. As she knows, the consultation paper raised a number of questions. We are trying to resolve and respond to those and to look at the great analysis that we had in responses. We will bring forward proposals, which she will have an opportunity to test when we bring forward the police reform Bill.

[Lord Cameron of Lochiel (Con)]

My Lords, it has been reported that the newly created PoliceAI centre will roll out large-scale pilots in up to 10 police forces to help officers triage, disclose and summarise digital evidence. Can the Minister inform your Lordships’ House as to what impact the police reform Bill, and specifically the proposed mergers of police forces, will have on these plans for a more enhanced role for AI in policing?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

At the moment, as the noble Lord knows, the Government’s policy objective is to reduce the number of police forces. We have asked the noble Lord, Lord Hogan-Howe, to look at that. Ministers have not yet had his final report with his proposals for the size of police forces. In the police reform Bill, we are trying to establish national responsibilities on crime, counterterrorism, training, and procurement. As part of our consultation, we are looking at what we need to do on a framework for facial recognition technology. As the noble Lord rightly said, we have put in £140 million, including £11 million on 40 new live facial recognition units, and we have looked at retrospective facial recognition. We are trying, in a very long-term plan, to get national capability, better resource and better efficiency for taxpayers, while at the same time recognising, as I know he does, that facial recognition is an extremely important tool for identifying known criminals, people who have broken licence terms and people who are missing, and for intelligence-led policing that can ensure that we know exactly who we are looking for and why.

[Baroness Blower (Lab)]

My Lords, this is clearly a very useful technology, but given that it has very wide application, can my noble friend say anything about how we monitor the level of possible misrecognition by these systems?

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

That is an absolutely vital point, as it is with many forms of technology. The old identity parade misidentified some people. ANPR—number plate recognition—occasionally looks at information that does not identify the right number plate. This is technology that is used to support the police. I reassure my noble friend that at the end of it there is always a set of human eyes. Humans determine whether to put a case to the CPS for prosecution and whether the information is correct. But AI, including AI used for facial recognition, means that we are saving the police hours, to the extent that we can potentially deploy an extra 3,000 police officer hours for other purposes. That is because AI can sift out, examine, look at characteristics and determine one, five or even 10 suspects who we might need to have further eyes on. It is important to look at the developments. Ultimately, it is under operational police and political control.

National Security (State Threats) Bill

Lord Hanson of Flint Excerpts

Report stage & 3rd reading
Tuesday 30th June 2026 Lords Chamber

Moved by

[Lord Hanson of Flint]

That the Bill do now pass.

[Lord Hanson of Flint (Lab)]

My Lords, I thank the officials of the House for the speedy turnaround of the amended Bill. It is a tribute to their dexterity that we have managed to turn this round much quicker than I expected, and our thanks go to them. I thank the officials in the Home Office and all the people behind the Bill who have given advice and support to Ministers on this crucial issue, including the security services and others. I particularly thank my private office, the Bill manager and the Bill team, and all the officials who are here.

I thank the Official Opposition for their courtesy, intensive scrutiny of the Bill and alternative suggestions. I say that to them genuinely, as well as to the noble Lord, Lord Marks, and the noble Baroness, Lady Doocey, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, and to other colleagues who have spoken, particularly in this case the noble Lords, Lord Anderson and Lord Alton, who have been very engaged with this Bill.

This Bill has been done for a purpose, which is to allow my right honourable friend the Secretary of State to have the necessary powers to consider how best to act after the determination of state threats. The Bill, as amended, will now return to the House of Commons where it will be further scrutinised, and where I am confident the amendments made in this House will be accepted. I hope that the Bill will then go for speedy consideration for Royal Assent. On Royal Assent, I assure the House that the Home Secretary will take urgent action to examine state threats and, if necessary, bring forward appropriate measures as soon as possible.

It has been a pleasure to take this Bill through the House over two days. There have been some tensions and discussions, but I hope that, at the end of the day, we are agreed as one that the Bill will be a useful tool for the Secretary of State to help protect this country and its citizens from state threats. I beg to move that the Bill do now pass.

[Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (LD)]

My Lords, from these Benches, I reiterate the thanks of all of us to the Minister and his team, both in the House and in the Home Office, and his Bill team generally, for the enormous help that we have had and for engaging with us. From our point of view, we have achieved some significant improvements to the Bill. We believe that the purpose of Bill, of which the noble Lord spoke, has been achieved with great speed and, generally speaking, in good humour. We are therefore happy that the Bill do now pass.