Written questions by Ribeiro-Addy.

What discussions she has had with ecommerce sites on the online sale of human remains.

I refer the Hon Member to the response given to her on 25 March 2025 from the Department for Business and Trade in response to PQ 38667.

What steps she is taking to stop the sale of human remains on ecommerce sites.

I refer the Hon Member to the response given to her on 25 March 2025 from the Department for Business and Trade in response to PQ 38667.

What steps will be taken to involve individuals with lived experience and civil society groups in shaping the modern slavery legislation proposed in the Restoring Order and Control policy paper published on 17 November 2025.

We are seeking to introduce new modern slavery legislation as part of our efforts to review and improve the modern slavery system. New legislation will enable us to clearly articulate the UK’s responsibilities under international law regarding modern slavery, allowing us to reduce opportunities for misuse, whilst also ensuring that we continue to provide the right protections for those who need it.The government recently concluded a public Call for Evidence to understand how it could improve the process of identifying victims of modern slavery, human trafficking and exploitation. It was open for twelve weeks and closed on 8 October 2025.This gave us an opportunity to hear the views of survivors, first responders, law enforcement and prosecution services, devolved administrations, NGOs and any groups or people with an interest in the modern slavery victim identification system. This work has fed into our understanding and will inform future policy and legislative development.We also plan to arrange workshops with survivors relating to the Call for Evidence themes. More information on these workshops will be shared in due course.I can confirm that we will be inviting key stakeholders to a Modern Slavery Forum meeting in January to consult on our plans. We will be able to confirm our legislative plans in due course.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the proposed asylum reforms on the mental health of vulnerable groups, including (a) asylum seeking children and (b) survivors of trauma.

Core Protection will allow those who are at risk to remain in the UK as long it is necessary, whilst it is unsafe for them to return.Pathways for unaccompanied children, families with children, and other vulnerable asylum seekers will be reviewed with full consideration of our EQIA and Section 55 duties to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in the UK.Details around employment opportunities, language training and community integration are subject to further policy development which will be set out in due course.

Whether her Department plans to release the proposed modern slavery legislation, referenced in the Restoring Order and Control policy paper published on 17 November 2025.

We are seeking to introduce new modern slavery legislation as part of our efforts to review and improve the modern slavery system. New legislation will enable us to clearly articulate the UK’s responsibilities under international law regarding modern slavery, allowing us to reduce opportunities for misuse, whilst also ensuring that we continue to provide the right protections for those who need it.The government recently concluded a public Call for Evidence to understand how it could improve the process of identifying victims of modern slavery, human trafficking and exploitation. It was open for twelve weeks and closed on 8 October 2025.This gave us an opportunity to hear the views of survivors, first responders, law enforcement and prosecution services, devolved administrations, NGOs and any groups or people with an interest in the modern slavery victim identification system. This work has fed into our understanding and will inform future policy and legislative development.We also plan to arrange workshops with survivors relating to the Call for Evidence themes. More information on these workshops will be shared in due course.I can confirm that we will be inviting key stakeholders to a Modern Slavery Forum meeting in January to consult on our plans. We will be able to confirm our legislative plans in due course.

With reference to her Department's policy paper entitled Restoring order and control: a statement on the Government’s asylum and returns policy, published on 17 November 2025, what steps her Department is taking to ensure that asylum seekers retain access to (a) employment opportunities, (b) language training and (c) community integration.

Core Protection will allow those who are at risk to remain in the UK as long it is necessary, whilst it is unsafe for them to return.Pathways for unaccompanied children, families with children, and other vulnerable asylum seekers will be reviewed with full consideration of our EQIA and Section 55 duties to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in the UK.Details around employment opportunities, language training and community integration are subject to further policy development which will be set out in due course.

Whether she has had discussions with airline companies to ensure passengers are informed of any potential passport validity issues prior to their trip.

It is for carriers to determine that they are satisfied their customer’s travel document meets the entry requirements of the country that they are travelling to on that day. While the UK government is not responsible for guiding airlines on the entry requirements of another country, or on the advice that they provide to their customers in preparation for their journey, it does provide guidance to British travellers regarding the passport requirements of other countries through the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office’s foreign travel advice on GOV.UK.

What estimate she has made of the number of travellers denied travel due to passport validity issues.

It is for carriers to determine that they are satisfied their customer’s travel document meets the entry requirements of the country that they are travelling to on that day. While the UK government is not responsible for guiding airlines on the entry requirements of another country, or on the advice that they provide to their customers in preparation for their journey, it does provide guidance to British travellers regarding the passport requirements of other countries through the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office’s foreign travel advice on GOV.UK.

How many legal cannabis farms there are in the UK.

There are currently 102 licences in extant to cultivate low THC cannabis (Industrial Hemp) in Great Britain. The majority of these licences will be issued to farms. A small proportion of these licences will be issued to educational or research institutes.The licences are generally issued for a validity period of three growing seasons and therefore will include licences issued in 2023, 2024 and 2025.Standard ‘cannabis cultivation licences’ may be issued for research or pharmaceutical purposes.In the last year (to 11 November 2025) 16 companies have been issued ‘High THC’ cannabis cultivation licences at a total of 19 sites. A proportion of these licences will have been issued for research purposes.

How many companies have a licence to grow cannabis in the UK.

There are currently 102 licences in extant to cultivate low THC cannabis (Industrial Hemp) in Great Britain. The majority of these licences will be issued to farms. A small proportion of these licences will be issued to educational or research institutes.The licences are generally issued for a validity period of three growing seasons and therefore will include licences issued in 2023, 2024 and 2025.Standard ‘cannabis cultivation licences’ may be issued for research or pharmaceutical purposes.In the last year (to 11 November 2025) 16 companies have been issued ‘High THC’ cannabis cultivation licences at a total of 19 sites. A proportion of these licences will have been issued for research purposes.

What guidance her Department has issued to police departments on appropriate use of live facial recognition technology.

The Home Office has not issued guidance to police forces on the use of live facial recognition (LFR) but the government is responsible for the legal framework. The legal framework governing police use of facial recognition requires compliance with data protection, equalities, and human rights laws, national guidance, the Code of Practice for surveillance cameras, and is supplemented by specific policies published by individual forces.The College of Policing has produced national guidance, in the form of an Authorised Professional Practice (APP); this includes when the police can use LFR, the categories of people they can look for and how the data is processed.Although there is a legal framework in place, this is complicated, inflexible and difficult for the public and police to understand. That is why we will shortly be launching a consultation to support the development of a new legal framework for law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies.

What steps she has taken to prevent the exploitation of workers on the Seasonal Worker visa in food supply chains following BBC’s File on 4 Abused for our Food investigation.

The Home Office undertakes extensive assurance action across the route, including significant numbers of boots on the ground visits, including interviews with randomly selected workers. Since March 2023, we have visited 387 farms and conducted 2560 interviews of both farm managers and workers.Defra’s Annual Seasonal Worker survey showed that the vast majority of respondents (94.2%) reported a positive experience from their time in the UK and 96.9% expressed a desire to return.Scheme Operators are required to have a clear employer transfer pathway in place as a condition of holding their sponsor licence, including transparent criteria for making a transfer request and a process for considering such requests. This is set out in published Home Office guidance, available at: Workers and Temporary Workers: guidance for sponsors: sponsor a seasonal worker - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)We currently have five scheme operators for horticulture and poultry workers who are responsible for 43,000 employees. We carefully manage the allocation each operator receives to ensure that it is commensurate with their scale, capabilities and experience as a scheme operator. Allowing workers to move freely between operators is incompatible with this important safeguard as it could place individuals at greater risk of exploitation.If a significant issue was identified with an individual employer, a Scheme Operators will promptly relocate any workers placed with that employer to a more appropriate farm. This can be done immediately with no need to for further visa applications or any interruption to the workers immigration status. The gives workers a safety net which explicitly ensures that they are not tied to their employer.

What protections are currently in place for police whistle-blowers reporting misconduct within their own force.

Police officers and staff have protections under ‘whistleblowing’ law, meaning they are protected from being unfairly dismissed or from suffering any detriment due to having made a protected disclosure. The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2020 expressly reflect this.Further, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), which is a prescribed body to whom police whistleblowers can make protected disclosures, runs a dedicated reporting line for police officers and staff.The College of Policing’s Code of Practice for Ethical Policing puts a duty on Chief Officers to facilitate and protect whistleblowers. Many police forces provide a confidential, internal reporting system to encourage reporting of concerns.Part 2 of the Angiolini Inquiry is considering a range of cultural issues in policing, including whistleblowing processes, and the Government will consider any recommendations it makes carefully.

Whether she plans to introduce a statutory right for members of the public to access substantiated police misconduct findings.

The British tradition of policing by consent relies on mutual bonds of trust between the public and the police, and where police officers fall below the high standards the public rightly expects of them, it is crucial they are held to account.Since 2015, there has been a presumption that all police misconduct hearings are made public, bar in exceptional circumstances. There is a statutory requirement for forces to publish the outcomes of misconduct hearings, unless preventing disclosure is considered necessary (e.g. in the interests of national security), for a period of at least 28 days. Members of the public can access published police misconduct outcomes via the website of the relevant police force.There are processes in place for the collection and publication of police misconduct data. The Home Office publishes data on the number of police officers subject to misconduct investigations, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as part of the annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, which can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsOfficers and staff moving from one force to another must obtain a new vetting clearance from the force they are transferring to before they are confirmed. In accordance with the College of Policing’s vetting authorised professional practice (APP), the parent force’s professional standards department (PSD) must provide a full complaint and misconduct history and any counter corruption intelligence relating to the officer concerned to the receiving force.In addition, the Police Barred List prevents those dismissed for gross misconduct and gross incompetence from re-joining policing. Forces must check whether a proposed employee or appointee is on the barred list before hiring them.

If she will make an assessment of the potential merits of establishing an independent National Police Misconduct Body to (a) collect and (b) publish data on police misconduct findings.

The British tradition of policing by consent relies on mutual bonds of trust between the public and the police, and where police officers fall below the high standards the public rightly expects of them, it is crucial they are held to account.Since 2015, there has been a presumption that all police misconduct hearings are made public, bar in exceptional circumstances. There is a statutory requirement for forces to publish the outcomes of misconduct hearings, unless preventing disclosure is considered necessary (e.g. in the interests of national security), for a period of at least 28 days. Members of the public can access published police misconduct outcomes via the website of the relevant police force.There are processes in place for the collection and publication of police misconduct data. The Home Office publishes data on the number of police officers subject to misconduct investigations, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as part of the annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, which can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsOfficers and staff moving from one force to another must obtain a new vetting clearance from the force they are transferring to before they are confirmed. In accordance with the College of Policing’s vetting authorised professional practice (APP), the parent force’s professional standards department (PSD) must provide a full complaint and misconduct history and any counter corruption intelligence relating to the officer concerned to the receiving force.In addition, the Police Barred List prevents those dismissed for gross misconduct and gross incompetence from re-joining policing. Forces must check whether a proposed employee or appointee is on the barred list before hiring them.

What recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of mechanisms for sharing police misconduct data between forces.

The British tradition of policing by consent relies on mutual bonds of trust between the public and the police, and where police officers fall below the high standards the public rightly expects of them, it is crucial they are held to account.Since 2015, there has been a presumption that all police misconduct hearings are made public, bar in exceptional circumstances. There is a statutory requirement for forces to publish the outcomes of misconduct hearings, unless preventing disclosure is considered necessary (e.g. in the interests of national security), for a period of at least 28 days. Members of the public can access published police misconduct outcomes via the website of the relevant police force.There are processes in place for the collection and publication of police misconduct data. The Home Office publishes data on the number of police officers subject to misconduct investigations, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as part of the annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, which can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsOfficers and staff moving from one force to another must obtain a new vetting clearance from the force they are transferring to before they are confirmed. In accordance with the College of Policing’s vetting authorised professional practice (APP), the parent force’s professional standards department (PSD) must provide a full complaint and misconduct history and any counter corruption intelligence relating to the officer concerned to the receiving force.In addition, the Police Barred List prevents those dismissed for gross misconduct and gross incompetence from re-joining policing. Forces must check whether a proposed employee or appointee is on the barred list before hiring them.

If she will take steps to prevent police officers under investigation from (a) resigning and (b) retiring before disciplinary proceedings are completed.

It’s crucial that police officers are held to the high standards rightly expected of them, and we’re committed to ensuring that the right mechanisms are in place to create an open and transparent police discipline system which delivers fair results for all.There are provisions in place that enable disciplinary proceedings to proceed if an officer resigns or retires, In addition, where the former officers and those who resign or retire whilst under investigation are taken through formal misconduct proceedings and it is determined they would have been dismissed, they are placed on the Barred List, which prevents those dismissed from re-joining policing.In May, we strengthened the system for holding former officers to account by introducing a statutory presumption of fast-track hearings for former officers, ensuring swifter proceedings for those who resign or retire before misconduct proceedings. Former officers who would have been dismissed had they still been serving will continue to be barred from future service.The Home Office publishes data on the number of allegations of misconduct involving police staff officers and staff, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as a part of its annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, available at:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsInformation is not currently available on the total number of officers who resign or retire whilst under investigation for misconduct.Where an officer leaves the service during the course of an investigation of gross misconduct, it is in the public interest that investigations and proceedings that would have led to dismissal are taken to their conclusion. Data on the number of former officers who received an outcome of “would have been dismissed” at a misconduct hearing or accelerated hearing can be found in table MP4 of the data tables accompanying the latest statistical release:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-misconduct-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2024This data is designated ‘Official Statistics in Development’ to acknowledge ongoing work to develop both the scope and data quality of these statistics. The Home Office is working with data providers to explore the availability of further data on officers who leave the service whilst under investigation.

How many police (a) officers and (b) staff have (i) resigned and (ii) retired while under investigation for (A) misconduct and (B) gross misconduct in each of the last five years.

It’s crucial that police officers are held to the high standards rightly expected of them, and we’re committed to ensuring that the right mechanisms are in place to create an open and transparent police discipline system which delivers fair results for all.There are provisions in place that enable disciplinary proceedings to proceed if an officer resigns or retires, In addition, where the former officers and those who resign or retire whilst under investigation are taken through formal misconduct proceedings and it is determined they would have been dismissed, they are placed on the Barred List, which prevents those dismissed from re-joining policing.In May, we strengthened the system for holding former officers to account by introducing a statutory presumption of fast-track hearings for former officers, ensuring swifter proceedings for those who resign or retire before misconduct proceedings. Former officers who would have been dismissed had they still been serving will continue to be barred from future service.The Home Office publishes data on the number of allegations of misconduct involving police staff officers and staff, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as a part of its annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, available at:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsInformation is not currently available on the total number of officers who resign or retire whilst under investigation for misconduct.Where an officer leaves the service during the course of an investigation of gross misconduct, it is in the public interest that investigations and proceedings that would have led to dismissal are taken to their conclusion. Data on the number of former officers who received an outcome of “would have been dismissed” at a misconduct hearing or accelerated hearing can be found in table MP4 of the data tables accompanying the latest statistical release:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/police-misconduct-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2024This data is designated ‘Official Statistics in Development’ to acknowledge ongoing work to develop both the scope and data quality of these statistics. The Home Office is working with data providers to explore the availability of further data on officers who leave the service whilst under investigation.

What steps she is taking to improve transparency around police misconduct records.

The British tradition of policing by consent relies on mutual bonds of trust between the public and the police, and where police officers fall below the high standards the public rightly expects of them, it is crucial they are held to account.Since 2015, there has been a presumption that all police misconduct hearings are made public, bar in exceptional circumstances. There is a statutory requirement for forces to publish the outcomes of misconduct hearings, unless preventing disclosure is considered necessary (e.g. in the interests of national security), for a period of at least 28 days. Members of the public can access published police misconduct outcomes via the website of the relevant police force.There are processes in place for the collection and publication of police misconduct data. The Home Office publishes data on the number of police officers subject to misconduct investigations, including breakdowns by outcome and misconduct finding level, as part of the annual Police Misconduct, England and Wales statistical series, which can be accessed here: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/police-misconduct-statisticsOfficers and staff moving from one force to another must obtain a new vetting clearance from the force they are transferring to before they are confirmed. In accordance with the College of Policing’s vetting authorised professional practice (APP), the parent force’s professional standards department (PSD) must provide a full complaint and misconduct history and any counter corruption intelligence relating to the officer concerned to the receiving force.In addition, the Police Barred List prevents those dismissed for gross misconduct and gross incompetence from re-joining policing. Forces must check whether a proposed employee or appointee is on the barred list before hiring them.

What recent assessment she has made of trends in the level of public confidence in police handling of complaints; and whether she plans to strengthen accountability mechanisms to improve that trust.

The Government is committed to strengthening the public’s confidence in the police. This includes ensuring that when officers fall seriously short of the high standards expected of them, they are swiftly identified and robustly dealt with.The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has a statutory duty to secure and maintain public confidence in the police complaints system, and as part of this role carries out regular surveys on public confidence. This data is published on the IOPC’s website: www.policeconduct.gov.uk/our-work/research-and-statistics/public-confidence. The most recent survey (2024/25) showed that the majority of the public say that they would complain if unhappy about an officer’s behaviour towards them. The percentage of respondents reporting they feel confident that police deal fairly with complaints is increasing; from 36% last year to 41% this year.The Government is taking action to improve public confidence. This includes introducing measures via the Crime and Policing Bill to put the victims’ right to review on a statutory footing for complainants who want to challenge a decision by the IOPC not to refer a case to the Crown Prosecution Service, and committing to an independent review into timeliness in the police misconduct system looking at what changes can be made to improve timeliness and effectiveness.