National Security

Rachel Hopkins Excerpts

Thursday 14th May 2026 Commons Chamber

[Dan Jarvis]

I am grateful to the shadow Minister for his sensible and reasonable approach this morning. I agree that, wherever possible, we should seek to work on these matters on a cross-party basis, and that is absolutely my approach.

I agree with the shadow Minister about the appalling and abhorrent attacks on the Jewish community that we have seen recently. I hope that he understands that the Government are absolutely committed to dealing with that poisonous hatred. I spelled out in my statement some of the measures that the Government have taken and will continue to take. However, the shadow Minister is right to hold us to account. This is not about warm words; this needs to be about deeds. That is precisely why we have allocated more funding to support that activity than has previously been the case.

We will take every opportunity to ensure that our response, collectively as a nation, is proportionate to the nature of the threat faced by British Jews across the country. It is abhorrent that any British Jew might feel the need to lead a smaller Jewish life, and I hope that there is complete agreement on that across this House. I give the shadow Minister and the House my absolute assurance that we will do everything we can to ensure that our Jewish communities not only are safe, but feel safe.

Entirely reasonably, the shadow Minister raised concerns about hate marches and protest activities that have taken place, and that may seek to take place in the future. Again, I hope that it is a point of consensus to say that the right to protest is fundamental to our democracy. At the same time, however, this cannot cross the line into unlawful or violent behaviour.

The police do have a range of existing powers that enable them to tackle unlawful behaviour, including at marches. It is important to note that new powers will soon be introduced by measures contained in the Crime and Policing Act 2026, which received Royal Assent at the end of April, to further restrict intimidatory protests, particularly around places of worship, with the addition of new offences around face coverings at protests. The Act also places a duty on senior officers to take account of the cumulative impact of protest activity when considering whether to impose conditions on a protest, so the police will be able to force protests that follow the same routes time and again to change the route or time of a protest. As right hon. and hon. Members will be aware, the Home Secretary has asked Lord Macdonald to lead an independent review of public order and hate crime legislation, and we look forward to receiving his recommendations in the near future.

The hon. Gentleman made an entirely reasonable point about the disparity in the Prevent caseload. Although he is right about that, I hope he would acknowledge that that is not a new challenge; it has been faced by both the previous Government and this Government. As he will be aware, we have appointed a new independent Prevent commissioner. I will be meeting him later today, and I categorically guarantee that this matter will be on the agenda for our discussion. We take the hon. Gentleman’s point very seriously, but I know that he will understand that it is not a new challenge for Government.

The hon. Gentleman referred to China. I hope I was clear earlier about my concern over the unique range of threats that China levels against the United Kingdom. I hope that he would accept that there are areas where we need to co-operate closely with China, and that there is always a balance to be struck, but I do give him an absolute assurance that national security will always be our priority.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned FIRS, which I suspect other hon. Members may also take this opportunity to mention. FIRS is still a relatively new tool. I am making sure that we are able to draw the maximum operational benefit from it, and any decisions will be communicated to Parliament in the normal way.

Finally, I want to respond to the hon. Gentleman’s point about Ben Wallace. Let me be crystal clear: the accusations that have been made about Ben Wallace are completely unacceptable. Ben Wallace has served our country. For reasons that the hon. Gentleman will completely understand, I am not going to get into the individual security arrangements for Mr Wallace— I cannot and will not comment on operational or intelligence matters—but I can say that I have met Ben Wallace to discuss the concerns that have understandably been raised. I am in touch with him. I will ensure that we continually assess the nature of the threats to individuals and their safety, and that the Government will absolutely be on the front foot in identifying and investigating such threats and will use all appropriate measures to defend against those threats. Any attempt by any foreign Government to coerce, intimidate, harass or harm their critics in the United Kingdom, including Mr Wallace, will not be tolerated.

[Rachel Hopkins (Luton South and South Bedfordshire) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for his statement on national security threats and the swift response to this heightened threat. The horrific recent increase we have seen in antisemitic attacks and acts of anti-Muslim hatred is causing understandable anxiety in diverse communities such as mine in Luton South and South Bedfordshire, despite great partnership working between Luton council, Bedfordshire police and our voluntary and community sector. Will the Minister reassure my constituents that the Government will continue to work with local authorities and police forces to provide the guidance and resources needed to keep communities safe and build social cohesion efforts to support strong and unified communities?