Written questions by Lowe.

What assessment she has made of the adequacy of laws to address cases in which parents or carers intentionally conceal, obscure, or fail to disclose a child’s procurement or possession of knives or other prohibited weapons.

There is no existing standalone legal duty to compel a parent, carer or any other bystander to report any criminality, including the procurement or possession of knives and weapons.Where parents are unable or unwilling to respond to potential safeguarding risk relating to knives, the strength of the system around the child (including schools, children’s services, police and youth justice) is vital in spotting concerns and linking children to support.The Government keeps legislation around knives under constant review. We are clear that knives should not be sold to those under 18 and measures in the Crime and Policing Bill (currently going through Parliament) are strengthening the legislation in this area by introducing a new two-step age verification process for online sale and delivery of knives. This will require buyers to provide a copy of their identification document, alongside a current photo, which will be verified at the point of sale and on delivery. It will be unlawful to deliver a parcel containing a knife to anyone except the verified buyer or to leave it on the doorstep or with a neighbour.We are also creating a new offence of possessing a knife with the intention to commit unlawful violence, a duty on sellers to report bulk sales, and giving the police a new power to seize knives when they believe they are likely to be used in connection with unlawful violence. Additionally, measures are being introduced to provide the police with the power to require social media, marketplaces, and search services to take down content about illegal knives and offensive weapons.In relation to bringing forward new legislation, the Chair of the Southport Inquiry recommended that the Law Commission review the merits of legal reform to introduce a legal duty on specified categories of person to report the criminality of another person. The Government will provide a full response to the recommendations from the Phase 1 report by the summer 2026.

If she will review the immigration status, including eligibility for indefinite leave to remain, of non‑UK nationals granted leave on asylum, refugee, humanitarian protection, discretionary leave, resettlement and other non‑standard and exceptional protection routes, who do not engage with statutory support, safeguarding and risk‑management interventions offered by public authorities.

The Government has set out significant reforms to the asylum system, which are designed to restore control, fairness and public confidence, while ensuring those in genuine need of protection receive that protection.The new core protection model carries clear expectations around integration, lawful behaviour and compliance. Protection status granted through the asylum system, including refugee status and humanitarian protection, will be limited to 30 months, subject to review and will be conditional as opposed to leading automatically to settlement. Decisions on any future grant of indefinite leave to remain under a protection route will take account of an individual’s conduct, compliance with the conditions of their leave, and engagement with the UK’s laws and institutions, in line with the Immigration Rules.The Home Office already has powers to review and, where appropriate, curtail leave where individuals breach conditions or fail to comply with requirements placed upon them. Protection status will be revoked where evidence emerges that it was obtained by deception; where protection is no longer needed such that they cease to qualify for refugee status or humanitarian protection; or where an individual commits a serious crime or represents a threat to our national security. These powers will continue to be used on a case‑by‑case basis, taking account of safeguarding responsibilities and the United Kingdom’s international obligations.The Government keeps the operation of the immigration system under continual review and will ensure that the new framework supports integration, protects the public, and maintains the integrity of the asylum system.

What assessment she has made of the adequacy of the Government's processes for responding to sustained parental or carer non‑cooperation with safeguarding or law‑enforcement authorities in cases involving escalating knife‑related violence risk within the home, including matters raised in The Southport Inquiry Report.

Where existing statutory frameworks underpin safeguarding processes, there is no requirement for parents or carers to co-operate. However, parental or carer consent is not required for agencies to share information relating to safeguarding and child protection. This is set out in Department for Education guidance on information sharing for safeguarding practitioners.Government is making this even clearer through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which includes a new Information Sharing Duty for the purposes of safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children, and will be accompanied by statutory guidance to support frontline practitioners to understand their responsibilities.Where a safeguarding concern has been identified relating to a child or young person, or there is suspected criminality relating to knife-related violence, multi-agency and law-enforcement partners can share information and conduct investigations without the consent of the relevant parent or guardian.In relation to Youth Justice processes, there are legal obligations that can be placed on parents and carers, to ensure that any risk relating to a minor can be appropriately managed. A court can issue a Parenting Order in a number of different circumstances, where children are engaged in criminal or antisocial behaviour. Parenting Orders require the parent or guardian to attend counselling or parenting support sessions and comply with other requirements the court considers necessary. Non-compliance can lead to breach proceedings in court and is punishable with a fine.Criminal orders that are placed on a child or young person themselves are applied by the court and generally (with few exceptions) parental or carer consent is not required.Where there are concerns that a child or young person is involved in criminality, and to protect public safety and prevent harm, the police will take forward their enquiries as appropriate, and parental or carer cooperation is not required to share information, conduct an investigation, place a minor under caution, or charge a minor with a criminal offence.The law already provides significant stop and search and wider enforcement powers, enabling police to disrupt immediate risk and remove weapons from the streets, including without the need for reasonable suspicion. Police can also arrest suspects, seize weapons, and evidence, and conduct searches of persons and premises where legal thresholds are met. These powers apply to children as well as adults. Where these powers are used on children, they are subject to additional statutory safeguards under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and its Codes of Practice to protect welfare and ensure proportionality.The Southport Inquiry Phase 1 report, published on 13 April, considers in detail the actions of the perpetrator’s parents and many of the issues raised here. The Chair has rightly raised the challenging question of how to minimise the risk that parents may choose not to co-operate or report concerns to safeguarding agencies such as social care or healthcare, or the police about their child having knives or other weapons, and has made two recommendations relevant to parents.In relation to future changes to strengthen oversight and powers, Government is considering these recommendations alongside the others in the report and will respond by summer 2026.

Whether Great Yarmouth has been identified for any place-based or targeted intervention relating to the removal of foreign national sexual offenders, and what criteria are used to determine whether additional enforcement activity is directed to specific local areas.

We do not hold information related to enforcement operations and/ or compliance visits targeting foreign national offenders at risk of reoffending in Great Yarmouth.The Home Office takes reports of immigration offences very seriously and encourages reporting via the public allegations form available at: https://www.imsallegations.homeoffice.gov.uk/start.Any suggestion of sexual offences should be reported to the police immediately.Immigration Enforcement operations can only be mounted where relevant, current information and / or intelligence suggests that individuals in breach of immigration law may be found at a particular location.We work closely with Policing partners to use immigration powers to disrupt criminal activity including those who commit serious crimes including sexual offences.Where Foreign National Offenders are required to report to police (as part of their strict immigration bail conditions) are identified as being removable from the United Kingdom we will take steps to detain and enforce their removal.To intensify these efforts we have redeployed staff and expanded our detention estate to bolster our capacity for swift, firm and fair returns.The latest published statistics for the removal of Foreign National Offenders and overall enforcement visits can be found below:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-releasehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/returns-from-the-uk-and-illegal-working-activity-since-july-2024/illegal-working-and-enforcement-activity-to-the-end-of-september-2025

How many enforcement operations or compliance visits targeting foreign national offenders at risk of reoffending were carried out in the Great Yarmouth area in each of the last five years, and what outcomes resulted from those operations.

We do not hold information related to enforcement operations and/ or compliance visits targeting foreign national offenders at risk of reoffending in Great Yarmouth.The Home Office takes reports of immigration offences very seriously and encourages reporting via the public allegations form available at: https://www.imsallegations.homeoffice.gov.uk/start.Any suggestion of sexual offences should be reported to the police immediately.Immigration Enforcement operations can only be mounted where relevant, current information and / or intelligence suggests that individuals in breach of immigration law may be found at a particular location.We work closely with Policing partners to use immigration powers to disrupt criminal activity including those who commit serious crimes including sexual offences.Where Foreign National Offenders are required to report to police (as part of their strict immigration bail conditions) are identified as being removable from the United Kingdom we will take steps to detain and enforce their removal.To intensify these efforts we have redeployed staff and expanded our detention estate to bolster our capacity for swift, firm and fair returns.The latest published statistics for the removal of Foreign National Offenders and overall enforcement visits can be found below:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-releasehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/returns-from-the-uk-and-illegal-working-activity-since-july-2024/illegal-working-and-enforcement-activity-to-the-end-of-september-2025

How many foreign national offenders convicted of sexual or violent offences against women in the Great Yarmouth area in each of the last five years were subject to deportation action, and how many have been removed from the UK.

We are fully committed to making our communities safer by returning those who break our laws. In the period between this government coming to power and January 2026, over 8,700 foreign national offenders (FNOs) have been returned from the UK. This is a 32% increase on the FNO returns recorded in the previous nineteen-month period ending June 2024, and we will continue to do everything we can to remove these vile criminals from our streets.The information that you have requested regarding FNOs in Great Yarmouth is not available from published statistics.Work is currently underway to publish more detailed information on FNOs subject to deportation. Further information on this work can be found at: Statistics on foreign national offenders and the immigration system - GOV.UK.

What proportion of recorded sexual offences and violent offences against women in the Great Yarmouth local authority area in each of the last five years involved suspects who were foreign nationals, broken down by offence type and immigration status at the time of arrest.

The Home Office collects and publishes recorded crime statistics from police forces in England and Wales including on sexual offences and violence against the person offences, broken down by year, and Community Safety Partnership (CSP) area, including for Great Yarmouth. These are routinely published as official statistics and can be accessed here:https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/police-recorded-crime-and-outcomes-open-data-tablesThe police recorded crime series does not include data on the nationality and immigration status of suspects.

Whether there are plans to increase or prioritise the deportation of foreign national offenders convicted of sexual offences in the Great Yarmouth area, and whether any targeted immigration enforcement activity is planned locally for this purpose.

We do not hold information related to enforcement operations and/ or compliance visits targeting foreign national offenders at risk of reoffending in Great Yarmouth.The Home Office takes reports of immigration offences very seriously and encourages reporting via the public allegations form available at: https://www.imsallegations.homeoffice.gov.uk/start.Any suggestion of sexual offences should be reported to the police immediately.Immigration Enforcement operations can only be mounted where relevant, current information and / or intelligence suggests that individuals in breach of immigration law may be found at a particular location.We work closely with Policing partners to use immigration powers to disrupt criminal activity including those who commit serious crimes including sexual offences.Where Foreign National Offenders are required to report to police (as part of their strict immigration bail conditions) are identified as being removable from the United Kingdom we will take steps to detain and enforce their removal.To intensify these efforts we have redeployed staff and expanded our detention estate to bolster our capacity for swift, firm and fair returns.The latest published statistics for the removal of Foreign National Offenders and overall enforcement visits can be found below:https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/immigration-statistics-quarterly-releasehttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/returns-from-the-uk-and-illegal-working-activity-since-july-2024/illegal-working-and-enforcement-activity-to-the-end-of-september-2025

What additional resources have been allocated to Norfolk Constabulary specifically for the prevention of violence against women and girls in the Great Yarmouth area over the last five years.

The Home Office funded police forces who were yet to undertake the Domestic Abuse Matters training which provides specialist domestic abuse training to police. In 2024/ 2025 we provided £83,056 funding to Norfolk to deliver this training.Support for victims and survivors of VAWG crimes at a local level is funded through local Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) rather than the Home Office. The Home Office invested over £20 million in 2025/26 to support victims of VAWG and raise awareness of these horrific crimes, including over £6 million for VAWG Helplines and over £2.6 million for the Flexible Fund, which offers direct cash payments for victims fleeing domestic abuse. These schemes are available for all victims across England and Wales.Through the Domestic Abuse and Stalking Perpetrator Intervention Fund, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Norfolk has been allocated £1,082,500 across the financial years 2023-24 to 2026-27. This funding aims to improve the safety, and feeling of safety, of victims and their children, by reducing the risk posed by perpetrators through locally commissioned perpetrator interventions.

How many deportations of foreign national offenders convicted of offences against women in Great Yarmouth in the last five years were delayed or prevented due to legal barriers, including outstanding appeals, asylum claims, human rights challenges, or lack of documentation.

We are fully committed to making our communities safer by returning those who break our laws. In the period between this government coming to power and January 2026, over 8,700 foreign national offenders (FNOs) have been returned from the UK. This is a 32% increase on the FNO returns recorded in the previous nineteen-month period ending June 2024, and we will continue to do everything we can to remove these vile criminals from our streets.The information that you have requested regarding FNOs in Great Yarmouth is not available from published statistics.Work is currently underway to publish more detailed information on FNOs subject to deportation. Further information on this work can be found at: Statistics on foreign national offenders and the immigration system - GOV.UK.

What the average length of time was between conviction and removal from the UK for foreign national offenders convicted of sexual or violent offences against women in Great Yarmouth in each of the last five years.

We are fully committed to making our communities safer by returning those who break our laws. In the period between this government coming to power and January 2026, over 8,700 foreign national offenders (FNOs) have been returned from the UK. This is a 32% increase on the FNO returns recorded in the previous nineteen-month period ending June 2024, and we will continue to do everything we can to remove these vile criminals from our streets.The information that you have requested regarding FNOs in Great Yarmouth is not available from published statistics.Work is currently underway to publish more detailed information on FNOs subject to deportation. Further information on this work can be found at: Statistics on foreign national offenders and the immigration system - GOV.UK.

Whether she will issue guidance to local authorities and other public bodies on the retention of historic records that may be relevant to investigations into group-based child sexual exploitation.

Baroness Casey made clear in her audit into Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse that local authorities, police forces and other relevant agencies should be required not to destroy any relevant records. Once the government responded to Baroness Casey’s report and accepted all her recommendations in June 2025, including establishing an Inquiry, organisations already had additional legal obligations to protect relevant information.Alongside her appointment on 9 December 2025, the Chair of the Inquiry wrote to the Cabinet Secretary to highlight the publication of the draft Terms of Reference at the earliest possible opportunity, to ensure that organisations were retaining information in line with the specific scope that the draft Terms of Reference established, including the time period, organisations, and issues likely to be examined. This letter highlighted the need for relevant local and national bodies to be ready to meet their legal obligations to provide relevant records, information and data to the Inquiry as it is requested.This letter was shared with Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to cascade the requirement to retain records to their relevant sectors, including local councils, health agencies and police forces.Following this, on 14 January 2026 the Home Office Permanent Secretary wrote to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and other arm’s length bodies to pass on the Chair’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary, to set out the need for full transparency and cooperation with the Inquiry.The Inquiry has full statutory powers to compel evidence and witnesses and the Inquiry Chair has been clear that any gaps in evidence will be identified and investigated. If the Inquiry identifies potential criminal wrongdoing, including the destruction of evidence that should have been retained, this will be passed to law enforcement to assess.We expect organisations to comply with the law on record retention and do not intend to issue further guidance. The Inquiry may choose to write to affected organisations on record retention in due course now it has been formally established.

What systems her department has put in place to ensure that local authorities, police forces and other agencies cannot delete or destroy records that may be relevant to the independent inquiry into grooming gangs.

Baroness Casey made clear in her audit into Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse that local authorities, police forces and other relevant agencies should be required not to destroy any relevant records. Once the government responded to Baroness Casey’s report and accepted all her recommendations in June 2025, including establishing an Inquiry, organisations already had additional legal obligations to protect relevant information.Alongside her appointment on 9 December 2025, the Chair of the Inquiry wrote to the Cabinet Secretary to highlight the publication of the draft Terms of Reference at the earliest possible opportunity, to ensure that organisations were retaining information in line with the specific scope that the draft Terms of Reference established, including the time period, organisations, and issues likely to be examined. This letter highlighted the need for relevant local and national bodies to be ready to meet their legal obligations to provide relevant records, information and data to the Inquiry as it is requested.This letter was shared with Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to cascade the requirement to retain records to their relevant sectors, including local councils, health agencies and police forces.Following this, on 14 January 2026 the Home Office Permanent Secretary wrote to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and other arm’s length bodies to pass on the Chair’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary, to set out the need for full transparency and cooperation with the Inquiry.The Inquiry has full statutory powers to compel evidence and witnesses and the Inquiry Chair has been clear that any gaps in evidence will be identified and investigated. If the Inquiry identifies potential criminal wrongdoing, including the destruction of evidence that should have been retained, this will be passed to law enforcement to assess.We expect organisations to comply with the law on record retention and do not intend to issue further guidance. The Inquiry may choose to write to affected organisations on record retention in due course now it has been formally established.

What visa categories were held by the parents of Axel Rudakubana during their residence in the United Kingdom; and what character-assessment checks were applied when issuing their visas.

It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.

What assessment she has made of whether all relevant public bodies have taken the necessary steps to preserve records that may be required by the independent inquiry into grooming gangs.

Baroness Casey made clear in her audit into Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse that local authorities, police forces and other relevant agencies should be required not to destroy any relevant records. Once the government responded to Baroness Casey’s report and accepted all her recommendations in June 2025, including establishing an Inquiry, organisations already had additional legal obligations to protect relevant information.Alongside her appointment on 9 December 2025, the Chair of the Inquiry wrote to the Cabinet Secretary to highlight the publication of the draft Terms of Reference at the earliest possible opportunity, to ensure that organisations were retaining information in line with the specific scope that the draft Terms of Reference established, including the time period, organisations, and issues likely to be examined. This letter highlighted the need for relevant local and national bodies to be ready to meet their legal obligations to provide relevant records, information and data to the Inquiry as it is requested.This letter was shared with Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to cascade the requirement to retain records to their relevant sectors, including local councils, health agencies and police forces.Following this, on 14 January 2026 the Home Office Permanent Secretary wrote to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and other arm’s length bodies to pass on the Chair’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary, to set out the need for full transparency and cooperation with the Inquiry.The Inquiry has full statutory powers to compel evidence and witnesses and the Inquiry Chair has been clear that any gaps in evidence will be identified and investigated. If the Inquiry identifies potential criminal wrongdoing, including the destruction of evidence that should have been retained, this will be passed to law enforcement to assess.We expect organisations to comply with the law on record retention and do not intend to issue further guidance. The Inquiry may choose to write to affected organisations on record retention in due course now it has been formally established.

What assessment she has made of the risk that relevant records may have been destroyed before formal retention notices were issued; and what steps she has taken to ensure no loss of material occurs.

Baroness Casey made clear in her audit into Group-Based Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse that local authorities, police forces and other relevant agencies should be required not to destroy any relevant records. Once the government responded to Baroness Casey’s report and accepted all her recommendations in June 2025, including establishing an Inquiry, organisations already had additional legal obligations to protect relevant information.Alongside her appointment on 9 December 2025, the Chair of the Inquiry wrote to the Cabinet Secretary to highlight the publication of the draft Terms of Reference at the earliest possible opportunity, to ensure that organisations were retaining information in line with the specific scope that the draft Terms of Reference established, including the time period, organisations, and issues likely to be examined. This letter highlighted the need for relevant local and national bodies to be ready to meet their legal obligations to provide relevant records, information and data to the Inquiry as it is requested.This letter was shared with Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice (MoJ) to cascade the requirement to retain records to their relevant sectors, including local councils, health agencies and police forces.Following this, on 14 January 2026 the Home Office Permanent Secretary wrote to the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and other arm’s length bodies to pass on the Chair’s letter to the Cabinet Secretary, to set out the need for full transparency and cooperation with the Inquiry.The Inquiry has full statutory powers to compel evidence and witnesses and the Inquiry Chair has been clear that any gaps in evidence will be identified and investigated. If the Inquiry identifies potential criminal wrongdoing, including the destruction of evidence that should have been retained, this will be passed to law enforcement to assess.We expect organisations to comply with the law on record retention and do not intend to issue further guidance. The Inquiry may choose to write to affected organisations on record retention in due course now it has been formally established.

Whether her Department uses stakeholder feedback from faith groups gathered during the previous Administration’s Independent Review of Prevent in developing current Prevent policy and guidance.

The Independent Review of Prevent was undertaken independently of the Home Office. When conducting the review, Sir William Shawcross independently and autonomously gathered feedback from a range of stakeholders, including civil society organisations and Prevent partners. This includes both faith-based and non-religious organisations. Any groups who were consulted were made aware of the Privacy Notice associated with the review. This makes clear that any evidence was collected on a confidential and, where requested, anonymous basis. All feedback was recorded with the aim of understanding how well Prevent operates, to help the government develop the strategy and policies to help safeguard people from being drawn into terrorism. Decisions on how the evidence was assessed and weighted were a matter for the Independent Reviewer. The recommendations made by the Independent Review of Prevent can be found in section eight of the Review, and the Government’s acknowledgement is detailed in the 2023 response. The Government’s current Prevent guidance is informed by these recommendations, rather than by direct use of any individual stakeholder feedback.

Which (a) faith groups, (b) religious organisations and (c) non-religious belief organisations were consulted in the previous Administration’s Independent Review of Prevent.

The Independent Review of Prevent was undertaken independently of the Home Office. When conducting the review, Sir William Shawcross independently and autonomously gathered feedback from a range of stakeholders, including civil society organisations and Prevent partners. This includes both faith-based and non-religious organisations. Any groups who were consulted were made aware of the Privacy Notice associated with the review. This makes clear that any evidence was collected on a confidential and, where requested, anonymous basis. All feedback was recorded with the aim of understanding how well Prevent operates, to help the government develop the strategy and policies to help safeguard people from being drawn into terrorism. Decisions on how the evidence was assessed and weighted were a matter for the Independent Reviewer. The recommendations made by the Independent Review of Prevent can be found in section eight of the Review, and the Government’s acknowledgement is detailed in the 2023 response. The Government’s current Prevent guidance is informed by these recommendations, rather than by direct use of any individual stakeholder feedback.

If she will publish a summary of the feedback provided by faith groups during the previous administration’s Independent Review of Prevent.

The Independent Review of Prevent was undertaken independently of the Home Office. When conducting the review, Sir William Shawcross independently and autonomously gathered feedback from a range of stakeholders, including civil society organisations and Prevent partners. This includes both faith-based and non-religious organisations. Any groups who were consulted were made aware of the Privacy Notice associated with the review. This makes clear that any evidence was collected on a confidential and, where requested, anonymous basis. All feedback was recorded with the aim of understanding how well Prevent operates, to help the government develop the strategy and policies to help safeguard people from being drawn into terrorism. Decisions on how the evidence was assessed and weighted were a matter for the Independent Reviewer. The recommendations made by the Independent Review of Prevent can be found in section eight of the Review, and the Government’s acknowledgement is detailed in the 2023 response. The Government’s current Prevent guidance is informed by these recommendations, rather than by direct use of any individual stakeholder feedback.

What recent assessment she has made of the (a) relevance and (b) accuracy of stakeholder feedback from faith groups gathered during the previous Administration’s Independent Review of Prevent.

The Independent Review of Prevent was undertaken independently of the Home Office. When conducting the review, Sir William Shawcross independently and autonomously gathered feedback from a range of stakeholders, including civil society organisations and Prevent partners. This includes both faith-based and non-religious organisations. Any groups who were consulted were made aware of the Privacy Notice associated with the review. This makes clear that any evidence was collected on a confidential and, where requested, anonymous basis. All feedback was recorded with the aim of understanding how well Prevent operates, to help the government develop the strategy and policies to help safeguard people from being drawn into terrorism. Decisions on how the evidence was assessed and weighted were a matter for the Independent Reviewer. The recommendations made by the Independent Review of Prevent can be found in section eight of the Review, and the Government’s acknowledgement is detailed in the 2023 response. The Government’s current Prevent guidance is informed by these recommendations, rather than by direct use of any individual stakeholder feedback.