Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what recent assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of powers to remove (a) false, (b) inciting and (c) otherwise harmful content from online platforms.

Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

The Online Safety Act gives online platforms new duties to put in place systems and processes to remove illegal content on their services. This includes illegal false communications and content which incites hatred. Platforms will also need to put in place systems and processes to protect children from accessing harmful and age-inappropriate content.

Ofcom is the regulator for this new regime, and it will have extensive enforcement powers to take action where companies do not comply with their new duties. The swift and effective implementation of the Act is a government priority, and we continue to keep online safety measures under review.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department made an assessment of the potential merits of including outdoor events in the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

The Bill has provided for events to be in scope where it is considered that there is an appropriate level of control and that mitigating measures for protective security and preparedness can reasonably be put in place.

For an event to be in scope of the bill, it must:

• take place in a building, on other land or at a combination of the two (unless the location already falls within the enhanced tier);
• be accessible to members of the public;
• have individuals in place at the event to take payment from members of the public or to check their tickets or passes; and
• be reasonably expected to be attended by 800 or more individuals at some point during the event.

Outdoor events that satisfy the above criteria will fall within scope of the Bill. Well established processes already exist to help those responsible for large open events to consider threats and develop appropriate protection and preparedness arrangements. This includes processes, led by the police, to consider security for large open events and, where appropriate, the deployment of appropriate measures and procedures working with event organisers.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether her Department made an assessment of the potential merits of including unticketed events in the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

An event must satisfy several criteria to be in scope of the Bill. One of these criteria is that the event must have employees, or other individuals involved in the event, checking that attendees have paid to attend the event, have an invitation granting access, or have a pass that grants access (which might include a free ticket).

Whilst this provision applies to paid-for events, this provision will also encompass free events, if there is a check that attendees satisfy a condition of entry as specified above.

We consider the ‘express permission’ requirement provides an appropriate basis to capture events where there is the resource and control to consider and take forward security requirements.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she plans to provide additional funding to the Security Industry Authority following the passage of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

The regulator function of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill will be delivered as a new function of the Security Industry Authority and will be funded by the Home Office.

The Security Industry Authority has an existing licence fee-funded arrangement that will not be used to deliver its functions under this Bill.

Work is ongoing to design the new regulatory regime and to finalise costs.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps he is taking with his international partners to help support (a) the Egyptian Red Crescent and (b) other aid organisations to increase the amount of humanitarian assistance in Gaza.

Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

The humanitarian situation in Gaza is intolerable. The UK continues to provide significant funding to partners to support those most in need, including £5.5m in additional funding for UK-Med to run field hospitals in Gaza, and an additional £6m for UNICEF to provide lifesaving aid to vulnerable families in Gaza. In October and November 2023, we provided support to the Egyptian Red Crescent (ERCS) to strengthen their operations to get aid into Gaza. This included providing enabling equipment to support the international response at Al-Arish including mobile storage units, forklift trucks, pallet trucks and lighting generators. We continue to play a leading role in alleviating the suffering in Gaza, including by matching up to £10 million of public donations to the Disasters Emergency Committee's Middle East humanitarian appeal.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will ensure that official correspondence from her Department to people seeking to establish biological family relationships in immigration applications makes clear that providing DNA evidence is the best way of establishing parenthood.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)

The Home Office has no statutory power to require DNA evidence as part of an immigration application, but applicants are free to volunteer DNA evidence. Where applicants choose not to provide DNA evidence, no negative inference can be drawn from that and used in the decision-making process.

Where there is insufficient evidence of a biological relationship, applicants are given the opportunity to provide further supporting evidence. This can include DNA evidence, a declaration of parentage by the Family or High Court, or any other relevant evidence of the existence of the claimed biological relationship.

As the provision of DNA evidence is voluntary, officials must not send out letters only inviting applicants to offer DNA evidence and are unable to advise applicants on the relative merits of the evidence they may choose to provide.

The publicly available guidance is shown on gov.uk: DNA Policy Guidance.

Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if she will take steps to remove the documentary Silenced from online distribution.

Answered by Chris Bryant - Minister of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)

The removal of online content is not within my department’s powers.

I can confirm that this film has not been classified by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC).

It is for the courts to determine whether this content is in contempt of court and for the online sites hosting the content to remove content where it breaches their own standards or where instructed.

A person may be liable for contempt of court where they know of an injunction and do anything to help or permit the person to whom it applies to breach its terms. It is for the Attorney General to consider each particular case and determine the appropriate course of action. Bringing proceedings for contempt of court is a Law Officer function which is exercised independently of the government.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many assessments for destitution her Department has made for people subject to No Recourse to Public Funds conditions in each of the last ten years.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)

We do not routinely publish the information you have requested, and we are unable to provide this information, as it could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

When an individual goes through the process of assessment for Change of Conditions, various No Recourse to Public Funds conditions are checked, with ‘destitution’ being one of these conditions.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she has made an assessment of the effectiveness of the pilot implementation of provisions relating to the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill by local authorities.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to clause 2 of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill, for what reason venues with a 100 person capacity will be excluded from full risk assessments.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she plans to provide access to training for premises covered by the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will consult Pool Reinsurance Limited on the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill.

Answered by Dan Jarvis - Minister of State (Home Office)

As a result of pre-legislative scrutiny, and extensive consultation in relation to proposals for the standard tier, the Government made significant changes to the Bill. This was to ensure public protection outcomes can be achieved whilst avoiding undue burdens on businesses and other organisations. This includes raising the standard tier threshold from 100 to 200.

Lowering the minimum threshold for the standard tier back to 100 would result in significant changes to the coverage of the Bill and increased costs to business. Government believes a threshold of 200 achieves an appropriate balance between protecting the public from the risk of physical harm and imposing burden on business, whilst continuing to deliver the Bill’s overall aims of increasing protective security and organisational preparedness across the UK.

We will continue to liaise with all relevant stakeholders as the Bill progresses.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, if he will make an assessment of the effectiveness of Ofcom in helping tackle the dissemination of online conspiracy theories.

Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

The Online Safety Act will require platforms to tackle false information where it is illegal or harmful to children. The Act will also hold Category 1 platforms to account over the enforcement of their terms of service, including terms relating to conspiracy theories. As the regulator, Ofcom will ensure companies comply with these duties. Section 178 of the Act requires the Secretary of State to carry out a review of the effectiveness of the regulatory framework and to lay a report in parliament. It is important to allow time for measures to be fully implemented before carrying out any review.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, whether her Department will distinguish between (a) relocation, (b) estate and (c) property agents within the housing sector in the context of the draft Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill.

Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Government is committed to ensuring that those living in the rented and leasehold sectors are protected from abuse and poor service at the hands of unscrupulous property agents. The Government will set out its position on the regulation of letting, managing and estate agents in due course.

The Government has also made clear it intends to publish draft legislation on leasehold and commonhold reform in this session so that it may be subject to broad consultation and additional parliamentary scrutiny. We will announce further details in due course.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, whether she has made an assessment of the potential impact of the draft Leasehold and Commonhold Reform Bill on relocation agents.

Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

The Government is committed to ensuring that those living in the rented and leasehold sectors are protected from abuse and poor service at the hands of unscrupulous property agents. The Government will set out its position on the regulation of letting, managing and estate agents in due course.

The Government has also made clear it intends to publish draft legislation on leasehold and commonhold reform in this session so that it may be subject to broad consultation and additional parliamentary scrutiny. We will announce further details in due course.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many assessments for destitution her Department has made for people subject to No Recourse to Public Funds conditions in each of the last five years.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Department for Education) (Equalities)

We are unable to provide this information as it is not routinely published, and it can only be obtained at a disproportionate cost.

When an individual goes through the process of assessment for Change of Conditions, various No Recourse to Public Funds conditions are checked, with ‘destitution’ being one of these conditions.