Written questions by McMurdock.

What discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business and Trade on ensuring consistent security standards across private delivery operators during periods of rapid temporary recruitment.

The Postal Services Act 2011 designates Ofcom as the independent regulator for the postal sector, with the powers to impose and enforce regulatory requirements on postal operators. In its review of postal regulation in 2022, Ofcom committed to ongoing monitoring of operators’ performance and keep under review the need for additional regulation to protect consumers.The Government currently has no plans to seek change to the statutory requirements, and it remains that matters relating to employment checks for delivery employees are for individual companies to consider. This is outside the remit of the Home Office.

If she will make an assessment of the adequacy of the regulatory framework for delivery operators, excluding Royal Mail, relating to a) employee vetting and b) security during peak trading periods.

The Postal Services Act 2011 designates Ofcom as the independent regulator for the postal sector, with the powers to impose and enforce regulatory requirements on postal operators. In its review of postal regulation in 2022, Ofcom committed to ongoing monitoring of operators’ performance and keep under review the need for additional regulation to protect consumers.The Government currently has no plans to seek change to the statutory requirements, and it remains that matters relating to employment checks for delivery employees are for individual companies to consider. This is outside the remit of the Home Office.

What recent assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of live facial recognition on security and passenger flow at UK borders and airports; and what evaluation has been undertaken in relation to the accuracy and reliability of facial recognition in those settings.

Facial comparison technology is currently in operation at the eGates at the UK border. eGates provide a safe, secure and efficient method for millions of passengers to cross our border each year. Technology deployed at the UK border is rigorously tested to ensure it is robust, resilient and effective.The Immigration White Paper, published May 2025, sets out our vision to revolutionise the border by using technology to make visible changes to security and the passenger flow.

What steps her Department has taken to assess how live facial recognition systems are used in other countries and how those approaches may be used in the UK.

The Home Office routinely makes international comparisons in policy development work. As part of designing a new legal framework for law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies, international comparisons will be considered.The Government launched a public consultation on this framework on 4 December.

What recent discussions she has had with the Information Commissioner’s Office on live facial recognition technology and its utilisation by police forces.

The Home Office meets regularly with the Information Commissioner’s Office to discuss law enforcement use of facial recognition technology.We will continue to work closely with them as we consult on a new legal framework for law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies.

What plans she has to allow for Parliamentary scrutiny of proposals to expand the use of live facial recognition technology.

There is an established basis for the police to use live facial recognition technology. 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. Although there is a legal basis for police use of facial recognition, the current legal framework is complicated, inflexible and difficult to understand, which in turn limits the extent to which facial recognition and similar technologies can be confidently used.That is why the government is consulting on a new legal framework to inform potential legislation.

Whether she plans to prevent the expansion of live facial recognition technology beyond counter-terrorism and serious crime into routine policing, retail monitoring, or crowd surveillance.

Live facial recognition technology, which involves processing live video footage of people passing a camera, is used in England and Wales to help locate people who are wanted by the police, in public spaces. The College of Policing has produced national guidance in the form of an Authorised Professional Practice (APP), setting out when the police can use live facial recognition and the categories of people they can look for. These include individuals wanted by the police or the courts, suspects, missing or vulnerable people, or those posing a risk of harm to themselves or others. In each case, inclusion on a watchlist must be justified and authorised, and must pass the tests of necessity, proportionality and use for a policing purpose.On 4 December the Government launched a consultation on establishing a new legal framework which focuses on the use of facial recognition and similar technologies by law enforcement organisations, for a law enforcement purpose.The consultation seeks views on whether seriousness of harm should be a factor to decide how and when law enforcement organisations can acquire, retain, and use biometrics, facial recognition, and similar technology. The consultation also asks for views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing ‘seriousness’ of harm and for which purposes should law enforcement organisations be allowed to use these technologies.The consultation also explains that the new legal framework will apply to law enforcement organisations. This would include all police forces in England and Wales, and national and specialist law enforcement agencies like the British Transport Police and National Crime Agency and for law enforcement activity by other public bodies such as the Environment Agency, HMRC or Border Force.We are aware that facial recognition and similar technologies are used more broadly across the public and private sectors. For example, we know that nightclubs use it to help identify barred patrons. Where that is the case they must comply with all relevant existing legislation including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 and guidance, with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as the principal regulator.Through the consultation we will therefore also consider whether public and private sector organisations ought to have due regard to the new legal framework and especially to any best practice established as a result.

On what statutory basis live facial recognition technology is deployed by police forces in England and Wales; and whether her Department plans to introduce primary legislation before any expansion of its use.

There is an established basis for the police to use live facial recognition technology. 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. Although there is a legal basis for police use of facial recognition, the current legal framework is complicated, inflexible and difficult to understand, which in turn limits the extent to which facial recognition and similar technologies can be confidently used.That is why the government is consulting on a new legal framework to inform potential legislation.

What recent assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of the rates of false positives generated 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 she plans to expand the use of live facial recognition technology for non-criminal matters.

Live facial recognition technology, which involves processing live video footage of people passing a camera, is used in England and Wales to help locate people who are wanted by the police, in public spaces. The College of Policing has produced national guidance in the form of an Authorised Professional Practice (APP), setting out when the police can use live facial recognition and the categories of people they can look for. These include individuals wanted by the police or the courts, suspects, missing or vulnerable people, or those posing a risk of harm to themselves or others. In each case, inclusion on a watchlist must be justified and authorised, and must pass the tests of necessity, proportionality and use for a policing purpose.On 4 December the Government launched a consultation on establishing a new legal framework which focuses on the use of facial recognition and similar technologies by law enforcement organisations, for a law enforcement purpose.The consultation seeks views on whether seriousness of harm should be a factor to decide how and when law enforcement organisations can acquire, retain, and use biometrics, facial recognition, and similar technology. The consultation also asks for views on what factors are relevant to consider when assessing ‘seriousness’ of harm and for which purposes should law enforcement organisations be allowed to use these technologies.The consultation also explains that the new legal framework will apply to law enforcement organisations. This would include all police forces in England and Wales, and national and specialist law enforcement agencies like the British Transport Police and National Crime Agency and for law enforcement activity by other public bodies such as the Environment Agency, HMRC or Border Force.We are aware that facial recognition and similar technologies are used more broadly across the public and private sectors. For example, we know that nightclubs use it to help identify barred patrons. Where that is the case they must comply with all relevant existing legislation including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018 and guidance, with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) as the principal regulator.Through the consultation we will therefore also consider whether public and private sector organisations ought to have due regard to the new legal framework and especially to any best practice established as a result.

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 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 steps are being taken to help prevent the misidentification of innocent individuals 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.