Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Department for Business and Trade:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the resilience of the independent hospitality sector to absorb the rising costs of (a) national Insurance, (b) alcohol duty, (c) energy prices and (d) food prices.
Answered by Gareth Thomas - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade)
The government will protect the smallest businesses and charities by increasing the Employment Allowance to £10,500. This means that in 2025/26, 865,000 employers (43%) will pay no National Insurance Contributions at all.
The alcohol duty cut on qualifying draught products impacts approximately 60% of the alcoholic drinks sold in pubs. This represents an overall cut in duty bills of over £85million a year.
Since 19 December 2024, Small and Medium Enterprises with fewer than 50 employees have been able to access free support to resolve issues with their energy supplier through the Energy Ombudsman. Consumer food prices depend on a range of factors including agri-food import prices, domestic agricultural prices, domestic labour and other manufacturing costs, and Sterling exchange rates.
We continue to work closely with HM Treasury on the challenges facing high street and other businesses.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of introducing legal safeguards for people wrongly flagged as criminals by private facial recognition systems.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office is not responsible for facial recognition systems procured and operated by independent retailers.
In terms of police use of facial recognition systems, the Home Office supports forces in developing systems, guidance and training to minimise the possibility of misidentification and the consequences of it. Additionally, there are measures in place to mitigate against facial recognition misidentifications by the police. Facial recognition algorithms provided by or procured with Home Office funding for police use are required to be independently tested for equitability frt-equitability-study_mar2023.pdf.
The government is taking the time to make sure that police use of facial recognition operates on a firm footing, including keeping the legal framework under review. To that end, I am listening carefully to stakeholders and partners and have been holding a series of roundtables with policing, civil society groups, regulators and others.
It is important to note that any matches made through facial recognition technologies will always be assessed by a police officer and investigated before an arrest is made; no arrest would ever be made based solely on a facial match made by a computer.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she has had recent discussions with (a) retailers and (b) trade unions on the risk of misidentifications by private facial recognition systems.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office is not responsible for facial recognition systems procured and operated by independent retailers.
In terms of police use of facial recognition systems, the Home Office supports forces in developing systems, guidance and training to minimise the possibility of misidentification and the consequences of it. Additionally, there are measures in place to mitigate against facial recognition misidentifications by the police. Facial recognition algorithms provided by or procured with Home Office funding for police use are required to be independently tested for equitability frt-equitability-study_mar2023.pdf.
The government is taking the time to make sure that police use of facial recognition operates on a firm footing, including keeping the legal framework under review. To that end, I am listening carefully to stakeholders and partners and have been holding a series of roundtables with policing, civil society groups, regulators and others.
It is important to note that any matches made through facial recognition technologies will always be assessed by a police officer and investigated before an arrest is made; no arrest would ever be made based solely on a facial match made by a computer.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what safeguards her Department has put in place to help protect people misidentified by facial recognition technology in shops.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office is not responsible for facial recognition systems procured and operated by independent retailers.
In terms of police use of facial recognition systems, the Home Office supports forces in developing systems, guidance and training to minimise the possibility of misidentification and the consequences of it. Additionally, there are measures in place to mitigate against facial recognition misidentifications by the police. Facial recognition algorithms provided by or procured with Home Office funding for police use are required to be independently tested for equitability frt-equitability-study_mar2023.pdf.
The government is taking the time to make sure that police use of facial recognition operates on a firm footing, including keeping the legal framework under review. To that end, I am listening carefully to stakeholders and partners and have been holding a series of roundtables with policing, civil society groups, regulators and others.
It is important to note that any matches made through facial recognition technologies will always be assessed by a police officer and investigated before an arrest is made; no arrest would ever be made based solely on a facial match made by a computer.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of facial recognition misidentifications on the public.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office is not responsible for facial recognition systems procured and operated by independent retailers.
In terms of police use of facial recognition systems, the Home Office supports forces in developing systems, guidance and training to minimise the possibility of misidentification and the consequences of it. Additionally, there are measures in place to mitigate against facial recognition misidentifications by the police. Facial recognition algorithms provided by or procured with Home Office funding for police use are required to be independently tested for equitability frt-equitability-study_mar2023.pdf.
The government is taking the time to make sure that police use of facial recognition operates on a firm footing, including keeping the legal framework under review. To that end, I am listening carefully to stakeholders and partners and have been holding a series of roundtables with policing, civil society groups, regulators and others.
It is important to note that any matches made through facial recognition technologies will always be assessed by a police officer and investigated before an arrest is made; no arrest would ever be made based solely on a facial match made by a computer.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if he will make it his policy to oppose the potential (a) forcible transfer and (b) ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza.
Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We oppose moving Palestinians in Gaza to neighbouring Arab states against their will. There must be no forced displacement of Palestinians, nor any reduction in the territory of the Gaza strip. Palestinian civilians should be able to return to and rebuild their homes and their lives. Our position is clear - we want to see a negotiated two-state solution that guarantees security and stability for both the Israeli and Palestinian people, with a sovereign Palestinian state, which includes the West Bank and Gaza, alongside a safe and secure Israel.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether he has made an assessment of the potential implications for his policies of reports of the looting of aid trucks in areas of Gaza that are under Israeli military control; and if he will hold discussions with his Israeli counterpart on this matter.
Answered by Hamish Falconer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
We welcome reports that looting of aid deliveries in Gaza has reduced. This remains a concern, and we continue to work with partners to monitor this. Israel must now continue to work with partners to ensure law and order is maintained in Gaza so that safe distribution of aid across the Gaza strip is sustained. The Foreign Secretary raised this with Israeli Foreign Minister Sa'ar in a call on 22 January.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department made of the potential merits of nationalising the water industry.
Answered by Emma Hardy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The Secretary of State has been clear the Government has no intention to nationalise water companies. Nationalising a water company would cost billions of pounds, and it would take years to unpick the current ownership model, during which time underinvestment in infrastructure and sewage pollution would only get worse. The Government wants to improve the situation in the water industry as quickly as possible, by focusing on improving the privatised regulated model.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of OFWAT in delivering value for money for consumers.
Answered by Emma Hardy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
We are confident that Ofwat are delivering their core functions effectively.
Ofwat holds water companies to account for the delivery of affordable, secure and resilient water services. Ofwat must protect the interests of consumers whilst ensuring the companies properly carry out and finance their statutory functions.
It is Ofwat's responsibility to independently scrutinise water company business plans and ensure that the prices water companies charge their customers are fair and proportionate. Ofwat’s final determination saved customers £11 billion compared to what companies initially proposed in the next price review period.
Furthermore, the Independent Water Commission, launched in October 2024 by the UK and Welsh Governments, will consider the roles and responsibilities of the water industry regulators and how we can ensure our regulators operate as effectively as possible.
Asked by: Paula Barker (Labour - Liverpool Wavertree)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment his Department has made of recent trends in the level of water chargers on consumers.
Answered by Emma Hardy - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
For too long, investment has not kept pace with the challenges of an ageing infrastructure system, a rapidly growing population and climate change. Bills will therefore now need to rise to invest in our crumbling infrastructure and deliver cleaner waterways.
These bill rises equate to around £3 additional per month on average, before inflation. This will pay to fix crumbling infrastructure, which will dramatically reduce sewage spills and lead to cleaner rivers, lakes and seas.
This Government has been clear with Ofwat that increases to customer bills must not flow through to company profits, or to executive bonuses where performance is poor.