Electronic Travel Authorisation: Dual Nationals

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Wednesday 25th February 2026 Commons Chamber

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

(Urgent Question:) To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department to make a statement on the impact of the UK’s electronic travel authorisation rules on British citizens who are also dual nationals.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mike Tapp)]

I thank the hon. Member for her urgent question. The introduction of electronic travel authorisations—ETAs, as they are known—is part of plans to modernise and digitise the UK’s border and immigration system by providing a much clearer picture of who intends to travel to the UK for short periods. ETAs will enable a more targeted approach to border control, strengthening security and ensuring a smoother travel experience.

From today, carriers will check that eligible passengers hold an ETA before travelling to the UK and will deny boarding to those who do not hold the correct permissions. British citizens, including those who hold dual nationality, do not need and are not eligible for an ETA. They must travel with a valid British passport or another passport endorsed with a certificate of entitlement to the right of abode, known as a COE.

Since the outset of the scheme, the Home Office has embedded clear messaging for dual nationals across the ETA communications campaign and published comprehensive guidance on gov.uk setting out clearly what dual citizens need to do. Since 2024, we have provided explicit written and spoken guidance to people who naturalise or register as British citizens, including through their application and at citizenship ceremonies. Since the start of the year, we have also emailed people who have registered or naturalised in the last 10 years where we hold usable contact details.

In order to support British nationals overseas—particularly those who have not held a passport for some time or have never held one—the Home Office has put in place temporary mitigating measures, which include issuing temporary operational guidance to carriers confirming that they may at their discretion accept an expired UK passport issued in 1989 or later alongside a valid non-visa national third country passport. Carriers may also choose to accept alternative evidence and can contact the Home Office’s carrier support hub, which may be able to confirm British citizenship for those with a digital record on the UK’s immigration and passport system.

It is not the intention of the ETA scheme to penalise our citizens who choose to live abroad. That is why we have given as much time as possible to allow passengers in such a position to make the necessary arrangements and why we have now put in place additional short-term measures to assist our nationals when travelling to the UK.

I finish by noting that the approach we have taken is comparable to that taken by many of our closest international partners, including the USA, Canada and Australia, who have already introduced similar systems—for example, the electronic system for travel authorisation for visitors to the United States—and we expect the EU to launch its own version. We are doing these checks to ensure that illegal migrants and foreign criminals cannot set foot here through our ports and borders by screening them before they travel. I am delivering a more secure, modern border.

[Manuela Perteghella]

I begin by declaring my interests as a British dual national and chair of the all-party parliamentary group on citizens’ rights. From today, British citizens are at risk of being prevented from returning to their own country because of the Government’s mishandling of the electronic travel authorisation scheme. British dual nationals cannot apply for an ETA, and they do not have a visa, so unless they hold a valid British passport they must produce a certificate of entitlement costing £589 simply to prove they are British, compared to £16 for a tourist. Carriers face £2,000 fines, so it is no good that that is left to their discretion. The result is chaos for law-abiding British citizens, and families will be separated.

Communication has been wholly inadequate. Putting guidance on a website is not a communications strategy. I understand that the people who recently naturalised were not warned in their grant letters or at their ceremonies, and there have been no clear messages at the border. When Canada introduced a similar scheme, it delayed enforcement and created a low-cost, temporary authorisation—and it worked. Why has this Government refused to adopt the same common-sense approach?

I therefore ask the Minister: will the Government postpone enforcement to prevent British citizens from being wrongly denied boarding? Will the Government introduce a low-cost, one-off travel authorisation, like Canada did, for dual nationals whose citizenship can easily be verified? Will the Government ensure urgent help through consulates, high commissions and the UK Visas and Immigration helpline? These are British citizens who have followed the rules. They deserve better than confusion, silence and a £589 bill simply to come home.

[Mike Tapp]

I thank the hon. Member for her response to my answer. I am clear that there has been no mishandling from the Home Office on this important issue. As I said in my speech, this has been on the Government website since 2024. We have also spent significant sums of money on getting the message out there, including through the relevant media and through communications to those who have naturalised over the last decade. Communications, as we all know in this place, can be difficult and some people can be missed. I have worked as hard as I can to get the message out there, including on Australian television.

The hon. Lady is right in saying that there is no eligibility for an ETA. That is due to the Home Secretary’s power to grant an ETA deriving from the immigration rules, which do not apply to British citizens. A passport costs £100. The turnaround times that we are seeing after the increase in demand are well within the expected limits, taking four weeks for those applying from outside the country, with the average at around nine days. That is fast. They can also apply for an emergency travel document in extreme circumstances and the turnaround times for that can be as quick as two days. There are also transitional methods in place, such as using expired passports that were issued after 1989. There has been significant communication and advice to carriers, including my meeting many of them to ensure that they fully understand the new measures in place. The carrier support line is also active, through which anyone encountering issues can make contact.

It is important that we introduce these measures. They are modernising, they are making our border more secure and they are very much in line with what other nations are doing. I have sympathy for those who may be encountering issues. On Monday next week, I will hold drop-in sessions that all Members of Parliament with specific cases—I do not want to go into too much detail on the Floor of the House—can visit.

Firearms Licensing

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 23rd February 2026 Westminster Hall

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Sir Alec. I thank the hon. Member for South Norfolk (Ben Goldsborough) for opening the debate on behalf of the Petitions Committee and the manner in which he did so, in a very measured speech.

I acknowledge the deeply emotive and tragic cases that have been raised in wider debate on this issue and which are perhaps the motivation for the changes proposed by the Government. These incidents shock us all, and I know that the thoughts of everyone in the House are with those affected by gun crime. I thank the more than 400 people in the Scottish Borders, among 120,000 people across the United Kingdom, who signed the petition. I also thank the many constituents who contacted me to express their concerns about these proposals, including Paul Allison and Rob Pile, both from Hawick, Jeremy Bidie from Lilliesleaf and Mary McCallum from Lauder.

The Government’s proposal to merge sections 1 and 2 firearms licensing has caused deep concern in our rural communities. Shooting is worth £3.3 billion to the UK economy and generates 67,000 full-time jobs, many in my constituency on the Scottish Borders. The proposal would represent one of the most significant shifts affecting countryside industries in decades and, most important, it would not make people feel safer.

The UK already has one of the most effective and strictest systems of firearms licensing in the world. Between April 2024 and March 2025, only four homicide cases involved a licensed firearm—a similar number to the previous year. Sadly, in many of the cases that I am sure right hon. and hon. Members will raise today, the proposed change would not have prevented tragedy; however, it would have a significant impact on those such as farmers, land managers and pest controllers, who require a shotgun for their job. It could even affect clay pigeon shooting, which is an activity enjoyed by many who do not even consider themselves to be shooters or part of rural industry. It would also have a negative impact on gun shops—businesses whose expertise ensures that firearms are sold only to those legally permitted to possess them.

Furthermore, plans to merge sections 1 and 2 firearms licensing would place an even greater burden on our already overstretched police forces.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

Rural police forces already handle the highest concentration of firearms licensing work in the country. Does the hon. Member agree that merging sections 1 and 2 will increase administrative burdens and lengthen waiting times for law-abiding applicants? Is there not also a risk that diverting more police time to additional paperwork could reduce the focus on illegal firearms and serious organised crime, which pose the greatest threat to public safety?

[John Lamont]

The hon. Lady makes an important point, which nicely leads into my next point. Poorly resourced police forces could be overwhelmed, and might even refuse to accept new applications, which happened in Gloucestershire in 2024. That would have a significant impact on people who rely on firearms for their job and livelihood. I am afraid that this is an example of the Government not really understanding how rural communities work.

Oral Answers to Questions

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 5th January 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Jones]

My hon. Friend is lucky to have such wonderful places in his constituency. Of course I will meet him—this is a very important matter. We are supporting the work of Historic England on a number of issues to tackle heritage crime, but I am sure that we can go further, and I look forward to talking to him about it.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

In my constituency, car thefts and related burglaries continue to rise. Nationally, almost four in five car thefts go unsolved. This is not low-level rural crime; it is organised, highly profitable, and deeply disruptive and upsetting for families and businesses reliant on vehicles. Will the Minister set out what steps the Government are taking to tackle organised vehicle crime, and will they back the Liberal Democrat proposals for a specialist national unit to work with police forces, such as Warwickshire police, to crack down on car crime?

[Sarah Jones]

The hon. Lady points to a very significant crime. Through our neighbourhood policing guarantee, we will be making sure that there are more neighbourhood police in our communities. We will obviously continue to work with car manufacturers to make sure we design crime out as much as we can. I would be very happy to talk to the hon. Lady about any other proposals she has, but this Government are investing more in policing and cracking down on crime.

Knife Crime

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Wednesday 15th October 2025 Westminster Hall

[Lee Anderson]

Education can play an important part in the reduction of knife crime, and deterrence should too. Some will say that we do enough and that action is being taken, such as the use of metal detectors or knife arches, which are being installed in schools and colleges, but how did we get to the point where knife arches are being installed in the buildings where we send our children to learn how to read and write?

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for securing this important debate. My constituent, Cody Fisher, a young footballer, was brutally stabbed to death at the Crane nightclub in Birmingham nearly three years ago. Since that horrific night, his family and especially his mother have been campaigning tirelessly with two Governments to get bleed control kits and the use of metal detectors in late-night venues. Will the hon. Gentleman join me in urging the Government to support Cody’s family’s campaign to ensure that no more families have to endure the heartbreak that they have endured?

[Lee Anderson]

I am happy to support the hon. Lady on Cody’s family’s campaign.

Politicians highlight the bans on certain knives, such as zombie knives, and in all honesty, those bans are not a bad thing, as we need fewer weapons on our streets, but the most common weapon used in knife crime is a simple kitchen knife, which is used in more than half of all stabbings. If someone wants to cause someone harm or to intimidate, they do not need a zombie knife, a machete or a sword; they can just get a kitchen knife.

Members will have heard about surrender bins or knife amnesties. This time last year, during the unrest, one knife bin was located outside a mosque in Small Heath in Birmingham. It was found to contain dozens of machetes, an axe, large knives and even an adapted knuckleduster knife, but how did we get to the point where we politely ask people to hand in their weapons at a local mosque? That is not policing or law enforcement; at best, it is wishful thinking or, at worst, it is total surrender to the problem.

That brings me to stop and search. In the year ending March 2024, police officers in England and Wales conducted more than half a million searches. More than 70,000 people were arrested and 16,000 weapons seized. That is thousands of potential crimes prevented, including murders, assaults, robberies and serious sexual offences. That is impressive, and we should commend our brave police officers for acting in the line of duty. A lot of people might say that stop and search does not have an impact on overall crime rates and that it does not put people off carrying knives, but that is to miss the point. Stop and search is about not only deterrence, but detection. It gives police officers the power to remove dangerous weapons before they are used, and it takes dangerous people off our streets.

In fact, in response to the intervention by the hon. Member for Bermondsey and Old Southwark (Neil Coyle), in London under Sadiq Khan’s leadership, there has been a reduction in stop and search of more than 23% in just one year, between 2023 and 2024. Meanwhile, knife crime in London has increased by nearly 60% in just over three years—

Palestine Action: Proscription and Protests

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Monday 8th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the remarks that have been published recently by the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

Can the Minister tell me what safeguards, if any, are in place to ensure that terrorism powers are not misused against people exercising their democratic right to protest peacefully against proscription, including elderly vicars holding placards?

[Dan Jarvis]

That is an entirely fair challenge. That is precisely why we have Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, look at these matters very closely—an expert in this field who is entirely independent from Government. There is respect for him across the House; the Government certainly hugely value his opinion. I would ask the hon. Lady to look carefully at what he has said on these matters.

Knife Crime: West Midlands

Manuela Perteghella Excerpts

Tuesday 21st January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. I thank the hon. Member for West Bromwich (Sarah Coombes) for securing this important debate. Knife crime continues to be a devastating issue across the UK, and the west midlands is no exception. The number of recorded offences—over 3,600 last year, a 6% increase on the previous year—underscores the urgent need for more robust preventive measures. As hon. Members have observed, a return to proper community policing will contribute to making our communities safer.

The tragic murder of my constituent Cody Fisher, a young and promising footballer and PE teacher, in a Birmingham nightclub in December 2022 highlights the devastating impact of these issues on families, friends and the wider community. Cody was fatally stabbed with a smuggled zombie knife, exposing serious failings in venue security. His mother, Tracey, has shown incredible courage in campaigning for Cody’s law, which would mandate bleed control kits and metal detectors in late-night venues—practical, cost-effective measures that would save lives.

Tackling knife crime requires more than reactive measures; we must address its root causes by prioritising investment in youth services, which have been cut to the bone, education in schools, and community-led programmes that offer young people opportunities and alternatives. We also need to tackle the online advertisement and sale of knives to our young people. Cody’s law is an essential step towards reducing knife crime in licensed venues and must be part of a broader strategy to protect young lives and create safer communities. I urge the Minister to adopt the proposal and ensure that no more families endure the senseless loss that Cody’s family suffered.