Written questions by Lowe.

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.

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.

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 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

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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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.

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.

What recent assessment she has made of whether the stakeholder engagement undertaken during the previous Administration’s Independent Review of Prevent attached equal weight to views expressed by (a) faith groups and (b) non-religious belief organisations.

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 assessment her Department has made of the extent to which the concentration of Graduate Route visa holders in low‑wage or low‑skilled employment overlaps with sectors that have high levels of young people aged 16 to 24 who are not in education, employment or training.

The Home Office is taking steps to improve data quality and transparency regarding agents. From 7 April Student sponsors will be required to provide agent details on the Certificate of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for all student applications where the sponsor has used an agent to recruit the student. From the same date, all sponsors will also be required to adhere to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).Minimum academic, attendance and engagement requirements already apply to the Graduate route. Graduate applicants are required to have successfully completed an eligible qualification whilst holding permission on the Student route and student sponsors are required to comply with the Home Office’s academic engagement policy in relation to all sponsored students.As announced in the Immigration White Paper, from 1 January 2027 Graduates will be granted 18 months of permission instead of 2 years in recognition of the need for Graduates to transition into Graduate level jobs more quickly.

Whether her Department has considered introducing minimum academic achievement requirements, alongside minimum attendance or engagement criteria, as part of the eligibility conditions for the Graduate Route.

The Home Office is taking steps to improve data quality and transparency regarding agents. From 7 April Student sponsors will be required to provide agent details on the Certificate of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for all student applications where the sponsor has used an agent to recruit the student. From the same date, all sponsors will also be required to adhere to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).Minimum academic, attendance and engagement requirements already apply to the Graduate route. Graduate applicants are required to have successfully completed an eligible qualification whilst holding permission on the Student route and student sponsors are required to comply with the Home Office’s academic engagement policy in relation to all sponsored students.As announced in the Immigration White Paper, from 1 January 2027 Graduates will be granted 18 months of permission instead of 2 years in recognition of the need for Graduates to transition into Graduate level jobs more quickly.

What assessment her Department has made of the Migration Advisory Committee’s May 2024 recommendation that the Government improve data quality and transparency around the use of international recruitment agents in higher education; and whether her Department has considered adopting or endorsing the Agent Quality Framework for use by higher‑education providers.

The Home Office is taking steps to improve data quality and transparency regarding agents. From 7 April Student sponsors will be required to provide agent details on the Certificate of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for all student applications where the sponsor has used an agent to recruit the student. From the same date, all sponsors will also be required to adhere to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).Minimum academic, attendance and engagement requirements already apply to the Graduate route. Graduate applicants are required to have successfully completed an eligible qualification whilst holding permission on the Student route and student sponsors are required to comply with the Home Office’s academic engagement policy in relation to all sponsored students.As announced in the Immigration White Paper, from 1 January 2027 Graduates will be granted 18 months of permission instead of 2 years in recognition of the need for Graduates to transition into Graduate level jobs more quickly.

Whether the Government has considered the Migration Advisory Committee’s recommendation in its May 2024 rapid review of the Graduate Route that universities be required to publish annual data on their use of international recruitment agents, including expenditure and the number of students recruited through such agents; and whether the Government plans to take this recommendation forward.

The Home Office is taking steps to improve data quality and transparency regarding agents. From 7 April Student sponsors will be required to provide agent details on the Certificate of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for all student applications where the sponsor has used an agent to recruit the student. From the same date, all sponsors will also be required to adhere to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).Minimum academic, attendance and engagement requirements already apply to the Graduate route. Graduate applicants are required to have successfully completed an eligible qualification whilst holding permission on the Student route and student sponsors are required to comply with the Home Office’s academic engagement policy in relation to all sponsored students.As announced in the Immigration White Paper, from 1 January 2027 Graduates will be granted 18 months of permission instead of 2 years in recognition of the need for Graduates to transition into Graduate level jobs more quickly.

What assessment her Department has made of the feasibility of using verified attendance or engagement data as part of eligibility criteria for the (a) Graduate Route and (b) other post‑study work routes.

The Home Office is taking steps to improve data quality and transparency regarding agents. From 7 April Student sponsors will be required to provide agent details on the Certificate of Acceptance for Studies (CAS) for all student applications where the sponsor has used an agent to recruit the student. From the same date, all sponsors will also be required to adhere to the Agent Quality Framework (AQF).Minimum academic, attendance and engagement requirements already apply to the Graduate route. Graduate applicants are required to have successfully completed an eligible qualification whilst holding permission on the Student route and student sponsors are required to comply with the Home Office’s academic engagement policy in relation to all sponsored students.As announced in the Immigration White Paper, from 1 January 2027 Graduates will be granted 18 months of permission instead of 2 years in recognition of the need for Graduates to transition into Graduate level jobs more quickly.