Violence against Women and Girls: Smart Glasses

Shivani Raja Excerpts

Wednesday 4th November 2026 Westminster Hall

[Shivani Raja (Leicester East) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Wishart. I thank the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine) for securing this debate and for her remarks, which summarised the concerns and challenges around this important topic very clearly.

This debate comes at an important time. We live in a time of rapid technological advancement, which is exciting but also must be safeguarded. We have seen how these developments can threaten the safety of our women and girls with deepfake videos, stalking and monitoring devices, and wearable tech such as smart glasses. The hands-free technology of smart glasses promises crucial assistance to visually impaired people across the country, but the promise must be backed up with the right precautions and protections. We should not restrict law-abiding citizens from using this technology where it causes no harm to others. Our responsibility is to ensure that the innovations do not outpace the very protections that keep our women and girls safe in public spaces.

Unlike smartphones, which are clear and visible when in use, camera-enabled smart glasses allow covert recording to take place at eye level, completely disguised as regular human eye-to-eye contact. For many women who are already navigating public spaces with extra vigilance, that creates real unease. Ministers have rightly set out that recording individuals without consent in order to cause alarm or distress or for sexual gratification falls under existing criminal offences such as harassment and voyeurism. The legal position is clear: anyone who misuses this technology to intimidate or harass women must feel the full force of the law.

The real issue, however, is enforcement. Proving intent when someone is covertly filmed on a bus or a high street is incredibly difficult, and once that footage hits the internet, the damage to a victim’s privacy and dignity is already done. Expecting victims to rely on post-hoc takedown requests under GDPR or the Online Safety Act 2023 places the burden entirely on the wrong shoulders.

[Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)]

Will the hon. Member join me in praising the work of the Police Service of Northern Ireland through initiatives such as Project Vigilant, which targets technologies that are used to abuse women and girls, and calling for greater research to support our police across the UK in identifying covert recording technologies, as that remains an operational hurdle?

[Shivani Raja]

The hon. Gentleman is right: we must view this issue in the context of the wider challenges of violence against women and girls.

The Government have pledged to halve violence against women and girls, which I wholeheartedly welcome, but warm words must be backed by actions. It was concerning that the Government missed their own deadline to publish their VAWG strategy on three separate occasions. Women and survivors deserve better than delayed timelines. Now that it has been published, the Government must ensure the law is strongly enforced so that perpetrators are caught and punished.

Technology should enrich our lives, not serve as a tool for covert harassment. I urge the Minister to work with manufacturers on basic safety-by-design standards such as mandatory untamperable recording lights on smart frames, and to ensure that our police forces have the digital tools needed to keep the women and girls in our communities safe and sound.

MOD Bicester and Illegal Migrants

Shivani Raja Excerpts

Wednesday 14th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Shivani Raja (Leicester East) (Con)]

We all understand that the protection of women and girls is a matter that transcends party politics. Today’s debate is not about point scoring, but it is an important conversation that we need to have. The current direction of this Government’s immigration policy is harming our women and girls. In communities across the country, those who are most vulnerable are put at risk by hordes of single men who do not understand basic human rights, including the right not to be raped. Why are we allowing individuals into our country who do not have the capacity to function as part of British society?

Small boat crossings surged by 50% between the 2024 general election and the end of 2025, reaching nearly 65,000 people. I know that Government Members will have their fair share of statistics to deploy in this debate, but we must focus on the situation right now and how to address it. The impact of that vast influx is felt right now by teenage girls who are too scared to walk to school alone, and by young women who are filled with fear when travelling home after an evening with friends. That fear is felt by our mothers, sisters, daughters and friends. I have felt that fear myself. Promises from those on the Government Benches to smash the gangs are hollow and empty. The Prime Minister is enjoying his new-found rhetoric of hope, but I encourage him and his ministerial colleagues to visit communities such as Piddington and Crowborough and see the reality that confronts the women and girls there.

Let us not make the mistake of thinking that we do not have a choice in this matter. In the first instance, I suggest to Government Members that a rural village of 350 people is not a suitable site for more than 1,000 single men. Beyond that, we in this House have the power to make policy decisions that will protect our women and girls. Our Conservative borders plan details just some of the measures that we could take to tackle illegal immigration, including leaving the ECHR and repealing the Human Rights Act, removing it from all immigration-related matters.

As it stands, the ECHR is a barrier to common sense. Why are Government Members so resolutely committed to remaining part of a treaty that prevents the deportation of foreign rapists and paedophiles? Lord Wolfson’s review confirmed that the UK Government are significantly constrained by ECHR membership. As long as we remain bound by these foreign court regulations, we cannot carry out the core duties that we owe to the British people. Any notion that we would lose fundamental rights upon leaving the ECHR is simply false. Advanced democracies such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand function effectively without the constraints of the convention, and it is naive to believe that the birthplace of parliamentary democracy cannot do the very same.

I agree that our country has been built on legal immigration, but we must be crystal clear that the doctors, nurses, builders, engineers and teachers who come here to contribute to our country and strengthen our economy are not the same as single men sitting in asylum camps and living off taxpayer money. My constituency is a testament to that distinction. It is one of the most diverse constituencies in the country and one of the most entrepreneurial, with more than 20,000 small and medium-sized enterprises driving Leicester’s economy. Making that distinction is crucial. Uncontrolled, illegal immigration undermines everyone who seeks to come here legally—those who want to integrate and spend thousands of pounds on visa applications and work tirelessly to build a better life for their families. That is who we as a Conservative party stand up for.

In closing, I encourage Members of this House to talk to women who now fear leaving their homes. They should listen to their fathers, brothers and husbands and hear how little hope they feel under this Government’s plans. They should go to Crowborough and see how the Home Office’s occupation of the training camp there is bringing hope to residents in Wealden. When we force more than 1,000—

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Order.