Holly Lynch (Halifax) (Lab) (Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary
of State for the Home Department if she will make a statement on
Contest, the United Kingdom’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism
2023. The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Suella
Braverman) Yesterday, the Government published an update to our
counter-terrorism strategy, Contest. A written ministerial
statement was laid alongside the Command Paper in Parliament.
Contest has a clear mission:...Request free trial
(Halifax) (Lab)
(Urgent Question): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home
Department if she will make a statement on Contest, the United
Kingdom’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism 2023.
The Secretary of State for the Home Department ()
Yesterday, the Government published an update to our
counter-terrorism strategy, Contest. A written ministerial
statement was laid alongside the Command Paper in Parliament.
Contest has a clear mission: to reduce the risk from terrorism to
the United Kingdom, our citizens and our interests overseas, so
that people can go about their lives freely and with confidence.
The terrorism threat level, set independently by the Joint
Terrorism Analysis Centre, has not changed, but the threat from
terrorism is enduring and evolving. Despite a prevalence of
lower-sophistication attacks in the UK, the threat we see today
and in the coming years is more diverse, dynamic and complex: a
domestic terrorist threat that is less predictable, harder to
detect and harder to investigate; a persistent and evolving
threat from Islamist terrorist groups overseas; and an operating
environment in which accelerating advances in technology provide
both opportunity for, and risk to, our counter-terrorism
efforts.
It is within that context that we judge that the risk from
terrorism is once again rising. By far the biggest terrorist
threat comes from Islamist terrorism. It accounts for 67% of
attacks since 2018, and about three quarters of MI5’s caseload.
The remainder of the UK terrorist threat is largely driven by
extreme right-wing terrorism, which accounts for approximately
22% of attacks since 2018 and about a quarter of the MI5
caseload. Our counter-terrorism response will be even more agile
in the face of an evolving threat—more integrated, so that we can
bring the right interventions to bear at the right time to reduce
risk, and more aligned with our international allies, to ensure
that we continue to deliver together against that common
threat.
Through this updated strategy, we will place greater focus on
using all the levers of the state to identify and intervene
against terrorists. We will build critical partnerships with the
private sector and international allies to keep the public safe,
and we will harness the opportunities presented by new
technology. There is no greater duty for this Government than to
keep the British people safe, and I will not rest in delivering
that mission.
The Contest update has very much been a sobering reminder of the
threats we face. Our agencies, to which we are so grateful, have
prevented 39 late-stage terror attacks in the past six years. The
majority of them, as we have heard, were Islamist-motivated, with
extreme right-wing terrorism making up the remainder. However, we
are concerned by certain omissions from the update, and the
disparity between the threats outlined and the responses
proposed.
On artificial intelligence, the update recognises the challenge,
saying that
“terrorists are likely to exploit the technology”.
We have called for new offences criminalising the training of
chatbots to radicalise individuals, but concrete measures are
woefully lacking in the update, so how are the Government going
to tackle that? The update says that the threat from Daesh and
al-Qaeda is on an “upward trajectory”, so can the Home Secretary
tell us how we are working urgently with international partners
to mitigate that risk?
The desperate situation in prisons is laid bare. With four of the
nine terrorist attacks in the UK since 2018 perpetrated by
serving or recently released prisoners, we are told individuals
may develop
“a terrorist mindset…during their time in prison.”
Not only are we failing to de-radicalise people in prison, but
people are being radicalised in prison, and failures to manage
those prisoners on release are putting the public at risk. Can
the Home Secretary tell the House how many terrorist prisoners
are due to be released in the next 12 months, and whether every
one of them has been engaged in intensive de-radicalisation
programmes and assessed for terrorism prevention and
investigation measures?
Finally, perhaps the most glaring omission is on state threats,
despite the fact that the director general of MI5 made it clear
in his annual threat update in November that Iran is
“the state actor which most frequently crosses into
terrorism.”
In February, our agencies said that they had to disrupt 15
attempted kidnap and assassination attempts here in the UK.
Remarkably, the report makes no reference to the resources, the
approach or the powers necessary to respond to that form of
terrorism. The Home Secretary knows that we have advocated for
proscription powers on multiple occasions, so why do the
Government continue to reject those proposals and why have they
not finally proscribed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps?
I thank the hon. Lady for her comments. I know that she
recognises the gravity and the sensitivity of this subject, and
she will share my view that we must face the threat of terrorism
united as one unified country.
Since March 2017, our agencies and law enforcement have disrupted
39 late-stage terrorist plots in the UK, as the hon. Lady said.
These have included the targeting of public figures such as
Members of Parliament, specific communities and events such as
Pride, and public locations such as iconic sites in London. I
want to put on record my profound thanks and admiration of all
the professionals who work day in, day out under pressure for all
they do to keep the British people safe every day. Many of us
will never know the lengths to which they go in applying their
expertise, dedication and public service attitude to put our
safety above their own.
I am very proud of this Government’s track record when it comes
to keeping the country safe. As Martyn’s law makes its way
through Parliament, I expect the Opposition to be responsible and
to support us in our efforts to provide this extra layer of
protection for venues. We have seen significant reforms in our
National Security Bill, now enacted. The hon. Lady mentioned
terrorism in prisons. We take a very tough approach to managing
terrorist prisoners, limiting their interactions with each other
and restricting their communications. We have developed a new
counter-terrorism assessment and rehabilitation centre for expert
psychologists and specialist staff to research and implement
specialist programmes to draw offenders away from terrorism.
Indeed, the independent review of Prevent made extensive
recommendations related to those in custody.
The hon. Lady referred to the use of artificial intelligence and
technology. Foundation-model AIs undoubtedly hold vast potential,
and they are crucial to the UK’s mission to become a science and
tech superpower, but there are still many unknowns with this
class of technology and many other forms of emerging technology
that pose significant, but not yet fully understood, public
safety and national security risks. I am particularly concerned
about the rapid development and public deployment of generative
large-language models like ChatGPT, and we are alert to the
exponential pace of their development, the emergent capabilities
which make the exact risks difficult to anticipate or control,
and the relative ease with which safeguards can be overwritten.
Those at the forefront of these technologies are explicit about
the seriousness of the risks if proper safeguards are not
developed quickly.
We look forward to promoting and enabling an open and
constructive dialogue and deepened collaboration with tech
company leaders, industry experts and like-minded nations as we
seek to ensure that the gifts of this technology are delivered
and that society is protected. Indeed, at the recent Five Eyes
security meeting in New Zealand, where I represented the UK, we
discussed the emerging hostile use of technology and
collaborative ways in which we may work at the international
level to mitigate those risks.
To conclude, I am very clear that we need to face the threats
united as one country. I hope that the Opposition understand the
heavy weight of that responsibility and that we will work
together constructively to keep the British people safe.
(Barrow and Furness) (Con)
One of the most effective ways to disrupt, identify and reduce
the terrorist threat is to bring together the disparate and
disjointed data sources that exist to link organised crime group
activity to terrorists. Will my right hon. and learned Friend
detail how the Contest strategy will help make that happen?
As I mentioned in my statement yesterday, there is huge
interaction—a blurring of the lines, if you like—between
terrorist organisations and groups, hostile state actors and
serious organised crime groups, acting on a transnational basis
with sophisticated and well-resourced networks and a heightened
level of elusiveness. That is exactly why our Contest strategy
has been refreshed to realign our priorities, resources,
technological capabilities and co-ordination across agencies to
properly respond in a swift and robust way to these emerging
threats.
Mr Speaker
I call the Scottish National party spokesperson.
(Cumbernauld, Kilsyth
and Kirkintilloch East) (SNP)
May I start by expressing my party’s deep gratitude to all those
who are working to protect us from despicable terrorist attacks?
Of course, our thoughts remain with all those who have suffered
as a result of such evil crimes.
On that note, while I welcome the strategy’s focus on victims,
may I raise the recent reports of survivors of terrorism who have
been deeply upset by poor treatment by the criminal injuries
compensation scheme? What discussions has the Home Secretary has
had with colleagues about fixing those problems?
The strategy’s commitment to engage across the tech sector is
welcome but, like the shadow Minister, I was surprised by its
very limited reference to the use of artificial intelligence for
radicalisation and instruction. The Windsor castle crossbow
attacker is a perfect example of someone being radicalised in
that way. Does the Home Secretary believe that legislation is
required, and what concrete steps are being taken to address the
use of AI in that way?
What extra funding will support the refreshed strategy,
especially given the reports that later this year a significant
number of convicted terrorists will complete their sentences,
which will require the most careful management? The strategy
recognises the critical importance of the closest partnership
working with the devolved Governments and agencies that have
responsibility for delivering various aspect of Contest. Can we
have the Home Secretary’s assurances that that close working will
continue?
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his observations. He talked about
support and compensation for victims of terrorism. More can and
must be done, which is why the Government are reviewing the
support available to better address victims’ needs. We are
absolutely committed to ensuring that victims of terrorism get
the full compensation to which they are entitled, in line with
schemes administered by the Criminal Injuries Compensation
Authority. Those schemes deliver for victims of terrorism. The
truth is that no amount of compensation can ever make up for the
ordeal suffered by victims of terror. That is why it is right
that survivors get all the support they need, in whatever form it
may be required, through the publicly funded CICA, which paid out
more than £158 million to victims of violent crime last year
alone.
(Chipping Barnet)
(Con)
I welcome the update of the strategy. It would be helpful if the
Home Secretary told us whether it will get the big tech companies
to do more to prevent terrorists from exploiting their
platforms—an issue highlighted in the Intelligence and Security
Committee report, “Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism”.
The technological aspect of terrorism is very real. Our enemies
are using more and more sophisticated tools against us for
hostile purposes. That is plain from an intelligence point of
view. That is why Contest makes a deliberate point of addressing
the technological features of this kind of work. A huge amount of
investment and operational capability has been put into
mitigating and dealing with that threat, most notably in the form
of the counter-terrorism operations centre—a new collaboration
centre that I had the honour of visiting recently.
Mr Speaker
I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
A few weeks ago I met Travis Frain, a founder member of Survivors
Against Terror, who explained how his life had been changed
forever by the Westminster bridge terrorist attack and how he did
not get the support he needed in the aftermath. This week, a
survey of 130 survivors of 11 major terrorist incidents found
that more than two thirds felt that the compensation scheme
overseen by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority was
unfair and unreasonable. The Home Secretary talked about a
review. It is unacceptable that these people are in that position
at the moment. When will the review actually be published?
As I mentioned, there are no words and there is no amount of
money that can adequately reflect the pain and suffering
experienced by victims of terrorism. That is why it is absolutely
right that we provide victims of terrorism with full compensation
and the fullest support possible and available to enable them to
move forward from these tragic events. As I said, we know that
more must be done. That is why we are reviewing the support
available. We need to better address victims’ needs through the
current schemes and ensure that they are properly meeting the
needs of victims.
(Reigate) (Con)
There are people in Ukraine who found their territory illegally
occupied and annexed by Russia, their children disappeared into
Russian custody and their land settled by ethnic Russians. Under
international law, we recognise the right of victims of the
criminal actions of the Russian state to resist. How can we
ensure that we do not end up characterising the legal actions by
the victims in that conflict, and in other analogous conflicts
around the world, as terrorism?
I am very proud of the UK’s track record of supporting Ukraine
and the Ukrainians both in Ukraine and abroad through the
devastating illegal conflict that Russia and Putin have waged
upon them. It is right that we provide military support, it is
right that we rolled out an extensive set of sanctions against
Russia, and it is right that we continue our international and
diplomatic support for Ukrainians.
(North Durham) (Lab)
I add my comments to those of the Home Secretary on our security
services and thank them for the work that they do. The
Intelligence and Security Committee report last year on
right-wing terrorism found that 30% of disrupted plots were from
right-wing terrorism, and that they mainly involved young people
who aimed to join either the armed forces or the police. We made
recommendations on tightening up the vetting of police officers
and proscribing membership of right-wing organisations for
members of the armed forces. Will the Home Secretary update the
House on what progress has been made on those two issues?
The right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to refer to the
emerging threat posed by extreme right-wing terrorism. The
director general of MI5, in his annual update, referred to the
ideologies that are emerging and increasing in activity, and the
independent review of Prevent focused on work that can be better
done. It is absolutely right that we take robust action. That is
why I am acting on the recommendations set out by Sir William
Shawcross on upgrading and updating Prevent, so that it better
responds to the risk of extreme right-wing terrorism, as well as
to the risk posed by Islamist terrorism.
(Crawley) (Con)
In updating the UK’s counter-terror strategy, what work are the
security services doing with UK Border Force to identify those
entering the United Kingdom, particularly by irregular means?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Terrorists and those who have
malign intent for our nation will exploit all sorts of
vulnerabilities, including at the border—that is obvious. That is
why the Contest upgrade deals specifically with this issue. We
need to further strengthen the UK border as a critical line of
defence against terrorism, taking advantage of new immigration
tools—detection, targeting and biometric capabilities—to identify
and block threats from entering the UK illegally in the first
place.
(Orkney and Shetland)
(LD)
This is a policy area that throws up some of the most difficult
cases ever to be found, so I welcome the Home Secretary’s
determination to build political consensus and ensure that we
work with our strategic allies. Some of the most difficult cases
around counter-terrorism involve UK citizens, especially children
who were trafficked by ISIS and are currently in north-east
Syria. That is an area where we risk becoming an outlier, because
all our allies have repatriated their citizens. It risks causing
friction between ourselves and our allies. Indeed, we have our
own responsibility, given the fact that these are UK citizens who
were trafficked. Is there anything in the strategy that will help
to tackle those very difficult cases?
The right hon. Gentleman is right to refer to this very
regrettable feature of modern day counter-terrorism. Paragraph 26
of the Contest strategy states:
“In recent years there has been a small increase in the number of
minors investigated and arrested by Counter Terrorism Police.
Most adverse activity conducted by minors has occurred online;
over half of under-18s convicted of terrorism offences over the
past five years were charged with non-violent offences (the
collection or dissemination of terrorist publications).”
It is vital that we are cognisant of this emerging threat, and
that we have the right resources, services and professionalism in
place to mitigate and intercept the threat at source as soon as
possible, but it is clear that wherever criminality has occurred
there will be a robust response from the appropriate
agencies.
(North West Norfolk) (Con)
Technology brings huge benefits, but it is also exploited by
terrorists. Is my right hon. and learned Friend confident that
the updated strategy will ensure that technology companies do far
more to prevent their services being used by those who wish us
harm and to co-operate with our security and law enforcement
services, particularly given the approach that some have taken on
encryption and child abuse imagery?
My hon. Friend has spoken about an issue that is close to my
heart: tackling online child sexual exploitation, which is rising
at an exponential and horrifying pace. About 32 million instances
of online child sexual abuse were recorded by the global
recording centre last year alone. In this country, we arrest 800
individuals a month involved in this heinous crime, and we
safeguard about 1,200 children a month. It is horrifying, and
that is why we are taking steps to work constructively with the
tech companies. In terms of Contest, I refer him to the extensive
sections on page 21 onwards and in other parts of the strategy
that talk about the technological aspects, how it is emerging and
our actions and response. Notably, our world-leading
counter-terrorism operations centre, newly established, will
bring together the right data, technology and expertise to
investigate and disrupt these types of threats.
(Birmingham, Perry Barr)
(Lab)
I welcome this statement. Although it was much delayed, it was
much awaited. One of the key things missing from the strategy is
the use of covert human intelligence sources—the people who used
to be known as informants to the police. Increasing numbers of
people caught under this network are people with mental health
issues. Will the Home Secretary provide a detailed account of how
many CHISs are used, what the results are and how many of those
reported are people suffering with their mental health?
I cannot get into details that relate to operational independence
and decisions made by the agencies in live investigations, but
what I would say is that I expect all agencies and law
enforcement organisations to use the full breadth of powers that
we have afforded them.
(Blackpool South) (Ind)
The current situation, whereby tens of thousands of young men are
arriving in small boats on our shores—primarily young men from
unstable parts of the world—is frankly an accident waiting to
happen. Does the Home Secretary agree that the British people
expect our borders to be robustly enforced, and that is just as
important when it comes to defending our nation from terrorism as
it is for anything else?
A strong border is critical to counter-terrorism. The Contest
2023 strategy clearly sets that out. In the Nationality and
Borders Act 2022, the Government revised schedule 7 to the
Terrorism Act 2000, expanding powers to prevent illegal entry,
including via small boats. Our migration and border system
provides a critical opportunity to identify and manage
individuals and goods that pose a terrorist concern. That is why
rigour and robustness in our borders is essential for national
security.
(Dundee East) (SNP)
In the Government’s response to the Intelligence and Security
Committee’s “Extreme Right-Wing Terrorism” report—I thank the
Home Secretary for referring to the scale of that threat earlier
in her remarks—they said that
“our counter-terrorism strategy, CONTEST, remains threat agnostic
so that rather than targeting specific ideologies, our tools,
powers and overall CT approach can adapt to changing threats
while also ensuring our approach is still able to identify and
assess what are inherently ideological threats.”
Can I simply ask her to confirm that nothing she has said today
and nothing that has been published changes the underlying
philosophical basis of how the Contest strategy operates?
As the Contest strategy refresh makes clear, a broad range of
ideologies and narratives draw people into supporting terrorism.
That includes, as I have said, Islamist terrorism, which is by
far the largest proportion of MI5’s case load, but there is also
an increasing threat from extreme right-wing terrorism that we
must confront, eliminate and do everything in our power to stop.
Wherever it comes from, and however people are radicalised into
extremist and violent behaviour, it is unacceptable, and we take
a robust approach, ultimately, to keeping the British people
safe.
(Gower) (Lab)
In June this year, the borders inspectorate said that not every
arrival into the UK at Manston was having security checks done as
part of their interview or having their property checked. Can the
Home Secretary guarantee now that every arrival is being fully
checked, and if not, why not?
Having visited the reception centres at Western Jet Foil and
Manston, and having been working closely on ensuring that the
right facilities, resources and mechanisms are in place to ensure
that those who arrive illegally are appropriately accommodated, I
can say that we ensure that those who arrive are checked. They go
through biometric checks and any other appropriate checks, and
then they are put through our processing centres, generally at
Manston. They are then put on a track, effectively, to other
onward accommodation if they have an asylum claim. That is the
general scheme that we have been carrying out for some time.
(Slough) (Lab)
The UK police and security services used to conduct more than 600
million real-time security checks on a shared EU platform before
we lost access after Brexit. At the time, the Government informed
us that we would have access to a shared platform within two or
three years. Now, the permanent secretary has advised that we
will not have access to a shared dataset until 2027 or 2028. Can
the Home Secretary confirm just how much of a damaging effect the
loss of this vital intelligence and security mechanism is having
on our ability to tackle terrorism and cross-border crime?
I know the hon. Gentleman is on his Brexit bandwagon, or whatever
it is, but the reality is that from a security point of view, we
have never had stronger collaboration with international partners
than today. We have continued to develop our global reach and
insight through sustained working with allies. That is
particularly with the Five Eyes, where we share an enormous
amount of common approach and strategic development, but also
with European partners. I have met many of my European
counterparts, and we share the common goal of national security.
In many instances, the UK is seen among European allies as a
leader and a nation valued for its contribution to pan-European
national security.
(Pontypridd) (Lab)
As the shadow Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Halifax
(), rightly stated, the
Government’s update acknowledges that when it comes to AI,
“terrorists are likely to exploit the technology to create and
amplify radicalising content, propaganda and instructional
materials, and to plan and commit attacks.”
However, there are no concrete plans in the update to address
those growing risks. Beyond pointing to the Government’s own
Online Safety Bill, which has been delayed yet again and watered
down, and other than the rhetoric we have heard today from the
Secretary of State, what are the Government actually doing? What
concrete plans are in place to tackle this growing problem,
because we have seen little to no action thus far?
The hon. Lady obviously has not read the document. If she had,
she would see our actions, our achievements and what our plans
are. First—I will save her the trouble of reading the document—we
are realising the full potential of our newly established,
world-leading counter-terrorism operations centre. I do not think
she has visited, but I recommend she tries to, because it is an
incredibly impressive, world-leading operational centre
established recently that brings together the right teams, data
and technology to more effectively identify, interrupt and
disrupt terrorists. We are also ensuring a broader range of
expertise from non-law enforcement interventions to mitigate the
evolving terrorist threat. We are maintaining our investment in
the critical threat assessment capabilities through the
world-class joint terrorism analysis centre. I could go on, but
in the interests of time, she would probably do better to read
the document first.
(Plymouth, Sutton and
Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)
The new Contest counter-terrorism strategy mentions that incel
threats
“could meet the threshold of terrorist intent or action”.
The person behind the shooting in Plymouth in 2021, where we lost
five people, could have had their actions informed by incel
culture and violent misogyny. Incel violence currently largely
falls out of the scope of all the Prevent strategy tactics. Does
the Home Secretary agree that it is now time to develop a
cross-Government incel strategy, so that we can not only prevent
people from going down that path towards violent misogyny, but
help rescue those who are doing so? That would provide a greater
level of community safety for women and our entire community, and
we would never again see the violence we saw in Plymouth repeated
on our streets.
The hon. Gentleman is an incredibly powerful advocate for his
constituents. Let me put on record my thoughts and prayers for
the loved ones of all of those who were tragically lost or
affected. Incel culture is not strictly within the Contest
apparatus, but it does need work. I readily accept that it is a
violent trend and a radicalising influence that is promoting a
culture that is totally at odds with the free, safe and
democratic society that we all love and want to cherish. I am
happy to speak to him about what further steps we can take as a
Government.
(North Down) (Alliance)
In March, the security threat level in Northern Ireland was
increased from substantial to severe in the aftermath of the
attempted murder of DCI John Caldwell. Since 2016, the additional
security funding that the Government provide to the Police
Service of Northern Ireland has been flatlining in cash terms at
£32 million a year. Will the Home Secretary undertake to review
that level of funding to ensure that the PSNI and the Security
Service have the tools to continue their good work in combating
both dissident republican and loyalist terrorism?
Northern Ireland-related terrorism remains a serious threat,
particularly in Northern Ireland. The Contest strategy does not
address the threat from Northern Ireland in Northern Ireland;
that is managed by a separate strategic approach led by the
Northern Ireland Office. At the Home Office, our Contest approach
covers the threat from Northern Ireland-related terrorism in
mainland Great Britain. It is important that we do not decouple
those two threats, which are very interlinked. We know that some
dissident republican groups continue to carry out terrorist
attacks, as the hon. Member referred to, so we need to ensure
that all the resources are available, and we want to ensure that
we support partners in Northern Ireland so they are readily
equipped to mitigate and respond to the threat.
(West
Dunbartonshire) (SNP)
In June, the national security adviser to the Canadian
Government—a key Five Eyes member—listed Russia, China and Iran
as key state actors that pose a threat to Canadian life. They
then added India to that list due to the rise of Hindu
nationalist activity specifically targeting Canadian Sikhs. Is
that anywhere in the Home Secretary’s thinking on extremism? If
not, why not?
As I said, general ideologies are set out in our Prevent approach
and our Contest approach. We are actor-agnostic, but we note
where these threats are emerging based on a casework analysis, as
confirmed by MI5 and other agencies. The predominant threats
relate to Islamist terrorism, but of course it is right that
there are robust law-enforcement responses for any kind of
violence or extremism that meets the criminal threshold.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I welcome very much the Secretary of State’s answers to the
questions posed. Further to the question from the hon. Member for
North Down (), will she outline what steps
have been taken to allocate additional funding to local police
forces in areas with higher threat levels such as Northern
Ireland, where republican terrorism is a real threat to the
democratic process? Bearing in mind that the police budget in
Northern Ireland has been cut in real terms in a time of crisis,
will she confirm what discussions have taken place with the Chief
Constable and the Policing Board to ensure that the commitment to
ringfencing funding for the battle against terrorism in all of
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is
maintained?
I made some reference to the specific nature of the threat posed
by Northern Ireland-related terrorism. It is clear that it is
primarily concentrated and directed against targets in Northern
Ireland. I regularly discuss with UK Government colleagues how we
can ensure robust defences across the whole piece, but I am happy
to see what more can be done through a conversation.
(Rutherglen and Hamilton
West) (Ind)
The rapid proliferation of end-to-end encryption and anonymous
messaging services allows terrorist groups to communicate freely
without the risk of detection or identification. Of course,
personal privacy must be upheld for ordinary citizens, so how are
the Government looking to work with tech experts to find
alternative ways of accessing the communications of members of
such groups?
This is something that really does concern me. The proposed
roll-out of end-to-end encryption without enabling lawful access
or without safeguards will pose a danger not just to national
security, but to children and to all our people. It is vital that
the technology companies work with us to roll out the available
technology—I am confident that it exists—to enable and protect
privacy rights, but at the same time to enable law enforcement
access and interventions to take place so that we can safeguard
children online, prevent radicalisation online and prevent
criminality online.
|
