Written questions by McMurdock.

Whether her Department has issued guidance to police forces on issuing contracts for live facial recognition technology.

The Home Office has not issued guidance to police forces on issuing contracts for live facial recognition technology. However, the Live Facial Recognition Commercial Framework produced by BlueLight Commercial is available to support police forces making procurement decisions before they issue contracts.Decisions on the contracting of live facial recognition technology are for individual police forces and other relevant authorities. Procurement decisions by police forces must comply with UK procurement law, including the Public Contracts Regulations 2015, Procurement Act 2023, and relevant Cabinet Office guidance on supply chain risk. They are also expected to follow the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice issued under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

What recent assessment her Department has made of the potential implications for her policies of reported levels of misidentification of (a) women, (b) ethnic minorities, and (c) young people by live facial recognition systems.

Police use of live facial recognition (LFR) is governed by equality, human rights, and data protection laws, and can only be used for a policing purpose where necessary, proportionate, and fair. LFR technology is not automated decision-making; it suggests possible matches not definite ones. Following a possible alert, it is always a specially trained police officer on the ground who decides what action, if any, to take.Facial recognition algorithms provided by or procured with Home Office funding for police use are required to be independently tested for bias. Independent testing is important because it helps determine the setting in which an algorithm can safely and fairly be used.The National Physical Laboratory (NPL) has independently tested the LFR algorithm used by the police. At the settings used by South Wales Police, the Metropolitan Police Service, and in the 10 LFR vans rolled out in August 2025, the NPL found that the algorithm had an 89% chance of correctly identifying someone on the watchlist of people wanted by the police or the courts. At worst, the algorithm had a 1 in 6,000 chance of generating a false alert on a watchlist containing 10,000 images. In practice, police have reported that the false alert rate has been far better than this. Importantly, the NPL also found no statistically significant differences in performance based on gender, age, or ethnicity, at the settings used by the police.The Government is committed to ensuring that facial recognition technology is used proportionately, responsibly, and with strong safeguards in place to protect the public. On 4 December 2025, we therefore launched a public consultation that sets out proposals for a new legal framework and strengthened oversight of facial recognition and other biometric technologies. The Government proposes creating a new oversight body to consolidate and clarify existing regulatory roles, ensuring responsible use of these technologies.

Whether passport photographs are being enrolled into biometric databases accessible for live facial recognition searches; and what assessment she has made of the privacy implications of this policy.

Passport photographs are not being enrolled into biometric databases accessible for live facial recognition searches. However, His Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) may conduct retrospective facial recognition searches against the passport database, on behalf of police forces, in relation to serious cases e.g. sexual offences, violent offences, serious and organised crime, or those that are of a national security interest. Guidance on this practice, and an Equality Impact Assessment has been published on the GOV.UK site.When deploying facial recognition technology, police forces must comply with existing legislation including the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 2018, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as well as their own published policies. For live facial recognition, police forces must also follow the College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Live Facial Recognition. Forces also need to comply with the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, which is supplemented by published policing policies.On 4 December the Government launched a consultation on law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies. We are consulting on a new legal framework to create consistent, durable rules and appropriate safeguards for biometrics and facial recognition. This framework will aim to strike the right balance between public protection and privacy.

Whether her Department has conducted a cost-benefit analysis on the fiscal implications of utilising live facial recognition systems; and how this compares to traditional policing methods.

The Home Office does not hold data on the number of convictions made following the police’s use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology.  Where police forces are using live facial recognition technology, the number of arrests made following each deployment are published on their respective websites.Facial recognition technology is a powerful and effective tool for policing, helping them locate wanted offenders, including those missing for years, and monitor individuals subject to court-imposed conditions, such as registered sex offenders.The use of LFR is increasing and delivering excellent results. Between January 2024 and September 2025, the Met Police reported over 1,300 arrests for offences including, rape, domestic abuse, knife crime, GBH and robbery, following live facial recognition deployments. They also arrested more than 100 registered sex offenders found in breach of their conditions.Police forces have assessed LFR to be cost-effective due to the ability to identify suspects at a speed that wouldn’t be possible by the vast majority of officers working without its assistance. The Met have found LFR to be three times more effective than existing tactics in identifying individuals they needed to speak to and the government believes that this technology is making a real difference in keeping communities safe.The Home Office is also funding a national evaluation to understand the impact of facial recognition on police and crime outcomes, and its relationship to public trust and confidence.

What recent assessment she has made of the potential impact of live facial recognition surveillance on the rights to privacy, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression.

Passport photographs are not being enrolled into biometric databases accessible for live facial recognition searches. However, His Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) may conduct retrospective facial recognition searches against the passport database, on behalf of police forces, in relation to serious cases e.g. sexual offences, violent offences, serious and organised crime, or those that are of a national security interest. Guidance on this practice, and an Equality Impact Assessment has been published on the GOV.UK site.When deploying facial recognition technology, police forces must comply with existing legislation including the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 2018, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as well as their own published policies. For live facial recognition, police forces must also follow the College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Live Facial Recognition. Forces also need to comply with the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, which is supplemented by published policing policies.On 4 December the Government launched a consultation on law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies. We are consulting on a new legal framework to create consistent, durable rules and appropriate safeguards for biometrics and facial recognition. This framework will aim to strike the right balance between public protection and privacy.

What recent analysis her Department has conducted on the potential benefits of utilising live facial recognition systems.

The Home Office does not hold data on the number of convictions made following the police’s use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology.  Where police forces are using live facial recognition technology, the number of arrests made following each deployment are published on their respective websites.Facial recognition technology is a powerful and effective tool for policing, helping them locate wanted offenders, including those missing for years, and monitor individuals subject to court-imposed conditions, such as registered sex offenders.The use of LFR is increasing and delivering excellent results. Between January 2024 and September 2025, the Met Police reported over 1,300 arrests for offences including, rape, domestic abuse, knife crime, GBH and robbery, following live facial recognition deployments. They also arrested more than 100 registered sex offenders found in breach of their conditions.Police forces have assessed LFR to be cost-effective due to the ability to identify suspects at a speed that wouldn’t be possible by the vast majority of officers working without its assistance. The Met have found LFR to be three times more effective than existing tactics in identifying individuals they needed to speak to and the government believes that this technology is making a real difference in keeping communities safe.The Home Office is also funding a national evaluation to understand the impact of facial recognition on police and crime outcomes, and its relationship to public trust and confidence.

How many people were scanned by live facial recognition systems in (a) England and (b) Essex in the last 12 months; and what proportion of those people were not suspected of any crime.

The Home Office does not hold data on the number of people scanned following the police’s use of facial recognition technology.Where police forces are using live facial recognition technology (LFR), the number of arrests made following each deployment are published on their respective websites. For example, the data for Essex Police’s deployments are here Live facial recognition | Essex Policeand the Metropolitan Police has published a Live Facial Recognition Annual Report.

How many convictions were secured as a result of utilising live facial recognition in the last 12 months.

The Home Office does not hold data on the number of convictions made following the police’s use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology.  Where police forces are using live facial recognition technology, the number of arrests made following each deployment are published on their respective websites.Facial recognition technology is a powerful and effective tool for policing, helping them locate wanted offenders, including those missing for years, and monitor individuals subject to court-imposed conditions, such as registered sex offenders.The use of LFR is increasing and delivering excellent results. Between January 2024 and September 2025, the Met Police reported over 1,300 arrests for offences including, rape, domestic abuse, knife crime, GBH and robbery, following live facial recognition deployments. They also arrested more than 100 registered sex offenders found in breach of their conditions.Police forces have assessed LFR to be cost-effective due to the ability to identify suspects at a speed that wouldn’t be possible by the vast majority of officers working without its assistance. The Met have found LFR to be three times more effective than existing tactics in identifying individuals they needed to speak to and the government believes that this technology is making a real difference in keeping communities safe.The Home Office is also funding a national evaluation to understand the impact of facial recognition on police and crime outcomes, and its relationship to public trust and confidence.

Whether reporting requirements are in place for police forces to notify her Department of their utilisation of live facial recognition technology.

There are no mandatory reporting requirements for police forces to notify the Home Office when they deploy live facial recognition (LFR) technology. However, transparency is an important safeguard, and the College of Policing’s national guidance requires forces to give public notice of LFR deployments, making use of their website and social media.In addition, forces must ensure that clear signage is displayed in areas where LFR is in operation, so the public is aware they are entering a facial recognition area. These measures help maintain public trust and compliance with legal obligations.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the Statutory Instrument, The Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025, on her Department's plans to phase out animal testing.

The Statutory Instrument to amend the Public Order Act 2023 does not alter the Government’s commitment to phasing out animal testing or maintaining high standards of animal welfare. All establishments licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) will remain subject to its full requirements. ASPA provides a robust regulatory framework that protects animals in science, including compliance checks and audits by the Home Office.It is anticipated that amendments to the Public Order Act can help to safeguard animal welfare through enabling scientific establishments to continue their operations in compliance with ASPA without disruptions which could put at risk their activity to protect animals.The Animals in Science Regulation Unit conducts announced and unannounced audits to ensure establishments comply with licence conditions, the Code of Practice, and ASPA. The Home Office has published guidance on administering and enforcing ASPA, alongside a Code of Practice that sets standards for the care and accommodation of animals used for scientific purposes.The UK’s legal framework already requires that animals are only used in science where no validated alternatives exist. The Government is accelerating efforts to develop and adopt these alternatives. In November 2025 the Government published a strategy setting out a long-term vision for a world where the use of animals in science is eliminated except in exceptional circumstances, by creating a research and innovation system that drives the development and validation of alternative methods.

What assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of the draft Statutory Instrument, The Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 on animal welfare.

The Statutory Instrument to amend the Public Order Act 2023 does not alter the Government’s commitment to phasing out animal testing or maintaining high standards of animal welfare. All establishments licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 (ASPA) will remain subject to its full requirements. ASPA provides a robust regulatory framework that protects animals in science, including compliance checks and audits by the Home Office.It is anticipated that amendments to the Public Order Act can help to safeguard animal welfare through enabling scientific establishments to continue their operations in compliance with ASPA without disruptions which could put at risk their activity to protect animals.The Animals in Science Regulation Unit conducts announced and unannounced audits to ensure establishments comply with licence conditions, the Code of Practice, and ASPA. The Home Office has published guidance on administering and enforcing ASPA, alongside a Code of Practice that sets standards for the care and accommodation of animals used for scientific purposes.The UK’s legal framework already requires that animals are only used in science where no validated alternatives exist. The Government is accelerating efforts to develop and adopt these alternatives. In November 2025 the Government published a strategy setting out a long-term vision for a world where the use of animals in science is eliminated except in exceptional circumstances, by creating a research and innovation system that drives the development and validation of alternative methods.

What steps she is taking to reduce immigration.

In July we began implementing the first set of reforms outlined in the Immigration White Paper. These reforms represent a fundamental shift in the UK’s approach to immigration, focusing on higher skills, lower numbers and tighter controls. Our approach will end the UK’s reliance on overseas recruitment and ensure the system better supports investment in the domestic workforce.We are now delivering on further commitments from the White Paper, with a range of changes to immigration rules laid on 14 October – focusing on tightening the system further and attracting highly skilled talent to the UK to boost the economy. The changes will come into effect over the following months.This Government is pursuing a comprehensive plan to tackle illegal immigration, through targeted enforcement against the small boat gangs, stronger action alongside our international partners to prevent Channel crossings, increasing the removal of people with no right to be in the UK, cracking down further on illegal working, and continuing our efforts to clear the asylum backlog and end the use of hotels by the end of this Parliament.The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act received Royal Assent on 2 December 2025. The Act provides new tools, powers and offences aimed at strengthening cross-system working and enabling earlier, more far-reaching interventions against organised immigration crime and serious organised crime.Furthermore, on 17 November, this Government published a statement entitled “Restoring Order and Control” which set out significant reforms to the UK’s asylum and illegal migration system. The statement outlined the current challenges, the Government’s objectives, and a comprehensive package of measures to restore order, control, fairness and public confidence in the system. In July we began implementing the first set of reforms outlined in the Immigration White Paper. These reforms represent a fundamental shift in the UK’s approach to immigration, focusing on higher skills, lower numbers and tighter controls. Our approach will end the UK’s reliance on overseas recruitment and ensure the system better supports investment in the domestic workforce.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the draft Statutory Instrument, The Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 on the right to protest against animal testing.

Peaceful protest is a cornerstone of our democracy, and we will always defend that right. But, where disruption from protest risks undermining our sovereign capability to prepare and respond to a pandemic, we must take action to protect key infrastructure and supply chains.The Life Sciences industry is of vital importance to this country. The sector provides crucial research to further medical capabilities in the UK and plays a central role in our pandemic preparedness capabilities. During the Covid-19 pandemic, our national response depended on having the tools and expertise to rapidly develop new vaccines and treatments.On 11 November, the OLS published a strategy setting out the steps that the Government will take over the next 5 years towards achieving a world where the use of animals in science is eliminated in all but exceptional circumstances. Until that goal can be achieved, the immediate and critical issue remains that the sector is being targeted by protestors who oppose current clinical research methods.That is why the Government is taking the proportionate step to amend section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023. This change will extend the definition of Key National Infrastructure within the Act to include the Life Sciences sector. The offence within the Act of interference with the use or operation of Key National Infrastructure will apply to the Life Sciences sector in addition to the existing sectors covered under section 7(6) of the Act. In turn, this change will reduce supply chain interference, protect the sector’s ability to operate in the UK, and ultimately support the UK’s pandemic preparedness and national health resilience.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the draft Statutory Instrument, The Public Order Act 2023 (Interference With Use or Operation of Key National Infrastructure) Regulations 2025 on the availability of public information on animal testing.

Peaceful protest is a cornerstone of our democracy, and we will always defend that right. But, where disruption from protest risks undermining our sovereign capability to prepare and respond to a pandemic, we must take action to protect key infrastructure and supply chains.The Life Sciences industry is of vital importance to this country. The sector provides crucial research to further medical capabilities in the UK and plays a central role in our pandemic preparedness capabilities. During the Covid-19 pandemic, our national response depended on having the tools and expertise to rapidly develop new vaccines and treatments.On 11 November, the OLS published a strategy setting out the steps that the Government will take over the next 5 years towards achieving a world where the use of animals in science is eliminated in all but exceptional circumstances. Until that goal can be achieved, the immediate and critical issue remains that the sector is being targeted by protestors who oppose current clinical research methods.That is why the Government is taking the proportionate step to amend section 7 of the Public Order Act 2023. This change will extend the definition of Key National Infrastructure within the Act to include the Life Sciences sector. The offence within the Act of interference with the use or operation of Key National Infrastructure will apply to the Life Sciences sector in addition to the existing sectors covered under section 7(6) of the Act. In turn, this change will reduce supply chain interference, protect the sector’s ability to operate in the UK, and ultimately support the UK’s pandemic preparedness and national health resilience.

What steps she is taking to increase the level of prosecutions for immigration-related offences.

Prosecutions themselves are a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service.The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 provides an array of new and stronger powers for law enforcement agencies to prevent organised immigration crime and bring further prosecutions against immigration related offences. These powers will, for example, make it a criminal offence to put lives in danger during a small boat crossing and will allow law enforcement to intercept smuggling gangs’ criminal activity earlier on in the investigations process. The Crown Prosecution Service has welcomed the package of new offences as it equips prosecutors with another tool to fight organised immigration crime, especially those involving dangerous Channel crossings. The full Act can be found at legislation.co.uk: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2025/31/part/3/enacted and part 3 provides for ‘Offences relating to things for use in serious crime’. Statistics published last week show there has been a 33% surge in smuggling arrests, convictions and seizures of criminal cash and assets over the last 12 months. More information on this can be read at What is being done to stop organised immigration crime? - GOV.UK

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of offences created by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 on illegal entry and arrival.

The Government is committed to protecting the UK’s border security and is working very closely with the National Crime Agency and law enforcement partners to ensure they have the funding, tools and expertise to identify, disrupt and dismantle organised crime groups involved in illegal migration.The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 created the offence of illegal arrival which carries a maximum sentence of 4 years imprisonment on indictment. The Act also raised the maximum penalties for the illegal entry and arriving without an Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA) to four years and entering in breach of a Deportation Order to five years. Notably, it also raised the maximum sentence for the offence of facilitating a breach of immigration law to life in prison. Prosecutions are pursued for all of the above offences, as they are for all immigration offences, wherever there is sufficient evidence to do so. These cases are then referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) where a decision on whether or not to prosecute is made. This decision is dependent upon the CPS’ assessment of the available evidence and whether or not it passes the CPS’ own public interest test. Information about the CPS’ decision making can be found here The Code for Crown Prosecutors | The Crown Prosecution Service.

What assessment she has made of the adequacy of sentencing levels for immigration-related offences under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022.

The Government is committed to protecting the UK’s border security and is working very closely with the National Crime Agency and law enforcement partners to ensure they have the funding, tools and expertise to identify, disrupt and dismantle organised crime groups involved in illegal migration.The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 created the offence of illegal arrival which carries a maximum sentence of 4 years imprisonment on indictment. The Act also raised the maximum penalties for the illegal entry and arriving without an Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA) to four years and entering in breach of a Deportation Order to five years. Notably, it also raised the maximum sentence for the offence of facilitating a breach of immigration law to life in prison. Prosecutions are pursued for all of the above offences, as they are for all immigration offences, wherever there is sufficient evidence to do so. These cases are then referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) where a decision on whether or not to prosecute is made. This decision is dependent upon the CPS’ assessment of the available evidence and whether or not it passes the CPS’ own public interest test. Information about the CPS’ decision making can be found here The Code for Crown Prosecutors | The Crown Prosecution Service.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the current level of conviction and sentencing patterns for immigration offences on immigration enforcement policy.

Statistics published last week show there has been a 33% surge in smuggling arrests, convictions and seizures of criminal cash and assets over the last 12 months. What is being done to stop organised immigration crime? - GOV.UK To maintain the highest standards of accuracy, the Home Office prefers to refer to published data, as this has been subject to rigorous quality assurance under National Statistics protocols prior to publication. Information about convictions of immigration offences is not available in our published data. Our published national data on enforcement activity is available at the following link and includes data on detected irregular arrivals to the UK Immigration system statistics, year ending June 2025 - GOV.UK

What recent assessment she has made of the potential impact of sentencing on deterring illegal entry into the UK.

We are tackling the criminal gangs abusing our borders and putting lives at risk, working closely with law enforcement and international partners to ensure they have the funding, tools and expertise necessary.The Home Office will seek to prosecute immigration offences wherever there is sufficient evidence to do so. Cases are then referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) where a decision on whether to prosecute is made. This decision is dependent upon the CPS’ assessment of the available evidence and whether or not it passes the CPS’ own public interest test.Statistics published 27 November on GOV.UKshow there has been a 33% surge in people smuggling arrests, convictions and seizures of criminal cash and assets over the last 12 months.The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 strengthens law enforcement agencies’ capabilities to tackle organised immigration crime and deter illegal migration. These powers will, for example, make it a criminal offence to put lives in danger during a small boat crossing with offenders facing up to 6 years in prison. The Act's impact assessment analyses how enhanced sentencing powers and new offences are expected to disrupt organised immigration crime, making smuggling operations riskier and less profitable.The CPS has welcomed the package of new offences as it equips prosecutors with another tool to fight organised immigration crime, especially those involving dangerous Channel crossings.

What steps she is taking to ensure food delivery companies carry out appropriate right-to-work checks on (a) subcontractors and (b) self-employed workers in their supply chains.

Clamping down on illegal working is a critical part of this government’s Plan for Change, and as part of the strategy to tackle Organised Immigration Crime. Ensuring fairness, order and control within the immigration and asylum system.Where an employer is found to have employed someone without the right to work, fines will be levied against the business. The Home Office has no current plan to further raise these fines at present.Under this government has been a significant increase in immigration enforcement activity in the UK, including more than 8,000 arrests during illegal working visits in the year up to October 2025 – a 63% increase on the same period 12 months prior.The Government is extending the Right to Work Scheme to ensure companies conduct right to work checks to prevent illegal working when they contract workers to provide services under their company name, this will include agency workers or self-employed individuals working in the gig economy. These new measures are included in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act.These new legislative measures will restrict the ability of employers to take advantage of illegal workers and encourage businesses to provide work opportunities to only those permitted to work in the UK. It will provide parity across industries and will set a level playing field for businesses to uphold their responsibilities to prevent illegal working in the UK.