Every parliamentary written question tabled by Clive Lewis this session, with the full answer and department. Back to the MP page.
Showing 1–20 of 222 · this parliament
Food and Rural Affairs, whether steps are being taken to provide staff transferring to a new water regulator in England with (a) a single set of terms and conditions, (b) access to the Civil Service Pension Scheme, (c) access to the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, (d) job security and (e) protection and support for those with disabilities and other needs.
Awaiting answer.
Food and Rural Affairs, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of ensuring a nationwide presence of offices for the new water regulator in England.
Awaiting answer.
Food and Rural Affairs, whether there were (a) formal minutes and (b) formal agendas for the meetings held between Ministers and Water company CEOs for the last three months of 2025.
Awaiting answer.
Food and Rural Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with trade unions on the proposed new water regulator for England.
Awaiting answer.
What steps she is taking to include Trans safety in the implementation of the updated EHRC Code of Practice.
The Government received an updated draft Code of Practice from the EHRC on 13 April, and, whilst we cannot comment on the draft Code, we intend to lay it in Parliament in May. We have always been clear that duty bearers should set their policies in line with the law. If they are uncertain as to how to apply the Equality Act 2010, they should obtain specialist legal advice. We have also always been clear that the laws to protect trans people from discrimination and harassment remain in place.
How she plans to support businesses groups who wish to remain trans inclusive in the context of the updated EHRC Code of Practice.
The Government received an updated draft Code of Practice from the EHRC on 13 April, and, whilst we cannot comment on the draft Code, we intend to lay it in Parliament in May. We have always been clear that duty bearers should set their policies in line with the law. If they are uncertain as to how to apply the Equality Act 2010, they should obtain specialist legal advice. We have also always been clear that the laws to protect trans people from discrimination and harassment remain in place.
Innovation and Technology, whether the Department has conducted an impact assessment on changes in the level of funding by the Science and Technology Facilities Council on trends in the level of (a) economic development and (b) STEM training, research and development.
Awaiting answer.
Innovation and Technology, what discussions her Department has had with the Institute of Physics and Royal Astronomical Society on the planned changes to the budget of the Science and Technology Facilities Council.
Awaiting answer.
What steps his Department is taking to (a) support the recruitment and training of midwives and (b) increase the availability of employment opportunities for newly qualified midwives.
Awaiting answer.
What is the content of the advice he has been given on the contract and performance of Palantir and the Federated Data Platform, particularly in relation to triggering the break clause in March 2027.
Ministers in the Department have been apprised of the nature of the NHS Federated Platform contract, that the seven-year contract term is split into an initial three-year term, plus extension options of two years, plus one year and one year, and that the initial term ends in March 2027. They have been notified therefore that the contract will be reviewed and, in line with standard contract management processes, that a decision will be needed on its extension. Ministers have received written and verbal briefing on the ongoing rollout of the NHS Federated Platform and the benefits achieved, including information which is published quarterly by NHS England at the following link:https://www.england.nhs.uk/digitaltechnology/nhs-federated-data-platform/impact/fdp-uptake-and-benefits/
What assessment she has made of the potential merits of introducing a statutory requirement for the deletion of custody images where no (a) charge and (b) conviction follows.
The retention and deletion of custody images is currently governed by the statutory Police and Information Management Code of Practice, and the associated College of Policing’s Management of Police Information (MoPI) guidance and Authorised Professional Practice. These require forces to retain images only where necessary and proportionate and to review and delete them in line with assessed continuing policing need. Individuals are also able to apply to the police to have their custody image deleted, where they believe continued retention is not necessary.Following the recent public consultation on biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies, the government intends to bring forward a new legal framework covering biometric retention rules.
Whether her Department has issued guidance on using experimental methods in conjunction with facial recognition.
The Home Office has not issued specific guidance. Police use of facial recognition and similar technologies is currently governed by a legal framework that includes data protection, equality and human rights laws, national guidance, a code of practice and force level policies. The College of Policing has also published guidance and an Authorised Professional Practice setting out police forces use new technology. However, we intend to bring forward a new legal framework to provide clearer, more specific rules.The Government’s aim is that a new legal framework will ensure all police forces across the country can use facial recognition and similar technologies with greater confidence, and that their uses and limits are clear to the public.Last year, we launched a public consultation on when and how biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies should be used, and what safeguards and oversight are needed.
Commonwealth and Development Affairs, if she will take steps to impose sanctions on the CEO of Israeli charity Shivat Zion, Shraga Evers, and the charity's official, Jonathan Vigné, in the context of support for British citizens in moving to illegal settlements in the West Bank.
The situation in the West Bank continues to be a priority for the UK. It is the UK's longstanding policy not to speculate on potential sanctions designations.
What assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of face-to-face civil legal aid provision for the residents of Norwich South constituency; when the provision was last reviewed; and what steps his Department is taking to improve local access to justice.
Legal aid is a vital part of the justice system and underpins our plans to build a justice system that works fairly for all parties.The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) continuously assesses the available supply of legal aid services throughout England and Wales across all categories of law. Details about volumes of contracted legal aid providers are published in the LAA’s official statistics (Tables 9.1–9.9). These figures help the LAA monitor the availability of services. Additionally, the LAA’s network of regional contract managers in England and Wales provide intelligence-led information regarding provision of legal aid based on contact with legal aid service providers. The LAA takes operational action, where it can, to respond to market pressures that may arise.For civil contracts, the LAA commissions legal aid services across larger geographic areas called procurement areas, rather than by local authority or parliamentary constituency. The relevant procurement area serving the Norwich South constituency varies depending on the type of civil law.Constituents in Norwich South can access face to face services across all civil categories of law for which legal aid is available. All procurement areas serving Norwich South exceed the minimum required number of legal aid providers. The LAA is satisfied there is adequate provision of legal aid services in Norwich South.We are committed to sustaining the long-term future of the legal aid sector and ensuring access to justice. That is why we are uplifting immigration and housing legal aid fees, areas identified by the Review of Civil Legal Aid as facing particularly acute challenges. This is a significant investment of £20 million a year once fully implemented – the first major increase since 1996.
Whether he has sought advice on triggering the break clause in Palantir’s contract with the NHS.
The current contract for the NHS Federated Data Platform is for seven years, ending in 2031, with the initial term ending March 2027. Advice is given regularly on the contract and performance, and ministers have been given advice on the need for a decision this year on the extension of the contract in line with standard contract management processes. We continuously assess performance against the contract, and performance of the programme as a whole, and publish data on uptake and benefits each quarter.
What assessment she has made of the potential impact of integrating facial recognition into existing CCTV infrastructure on civil liberties.
The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.
What assessment she has made of the cost-effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition technology in comparison to traditional policing methods.
The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.
What assessment she has made of the proportionality of deploying mass surveillance technology to address low level offences.
The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.
What assessment she has made of the potential merits of introducing a statutory requirement for the deletion of custody images where no charge or conviction follows.
The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.
What guidance her Department has issued on using experimental methods in conjunction with facial recognition; and who is responsible for enforcing that guidance.
The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.