Defending Democracy Taskforce

Question

14:58:00

Asked by

To ask His Majesty’s Government, further to the answer by Lord Hanson of Flint on 20 November (HL Deb col 207), what progress the Defending Democracy Taskforce has made with its review of security and counter-terrorism.

As a resident of Wales, I endorse the comments made about Baroness Randerson and her service to Wales and the Wales Office in particular. The counter-extremism review concluded over the summer and Ministers are now considering the recommendations. The Defending Democracy Taskforce will drive a whole-of-government approach to a full range of threats to our democracy, which includes ensuring that elected representatives can carry out their roles safely. Since July, we have been learning the lessons of the general election also, with a particular view towards the upcoming local elections in May. The Government will update the House on that work in due course.

I am grateful to the Minister for that Answer. What assessment has the task force made of whether any foreign state or states seek to promote the introduction in Britain of a blasphemy law, which would be—and I hope the Government will agree on this point—completely unacceptable?

The Government keep under review at all times the influence and threats from foreign powers. I will reflect on the particular point the noble Lord mentioned, but we are very clear that foreign influence on UK government policy, or the undermining of elections, is not acceptable.

My Lords, the Defending Democracy Taskforce has a relatively narrow focus on hostile states and covert action. What we have seen recently have been private actions, very often made openly, from within states we regarded as friendly, including misinformation, the weaponisation of social media and flows of funds, actual and promised, which are clearly foreign interference in British politics. Does that come within the Defending Democracy Taskforce remit, and, if not, which elements of our Government will respond to these threats?

The task force is looking at a whole range of issues, not just foreign interference and interference in elections; it is also looking at intimidation and actions at general elections and other elections. The National Security Act 2023, which had cross-party support in this House, provides the security services and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to deter and detect the type of influences the noble Lord mentioned. The task force will look at that and, as with the counterterrorism and security review, bring forward proposals in due course to this House and to the House of Commons.

The task-force focus on candidate and election intimidation is welcome, and the Minister knows that I have made a number of recommendations in that regard. What thought have the Government given to how the task force will interact with the Speaker’s Conference—announced in the autumn and currently taking evidence—on that subject?

The Speaker’s Conference is a matter for the parliamentary authorities, and we will feed into that as a Government. The Defending Democracy Taskforce is very clear that we need to look at what we need to do to protect the integrity of UK elections and to stop intimidation. Therefore, in that context, I hope the noble Lord will welcome the fact that, in February, we will be particularly looking at the issues of harassment and intimidation and making recommendations accordingly that I hope can help feed into the Speaker’s Conference in due course.

My Lords, the day after the Prime Minister’s predecessor announced his intention to hold a general election—a decision that terminated the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy’s inquiry into defending democracy—my noble friend Lady Beckett, the chair of that committee, of which I was a member, wrote to the then Prime Minister and outlined the committee’s provisional findings, which emphasised the limits of our democratic resilience. That letter, which is still unanswered, contained the recommendation that the creation of political deepfakes should be made illegal. Will the task-force review take into account the work of the Joint Committee and, in particular, that recommendation?

Again, I hope I can assure my noble friend that the Government take the issue of deepfakes, AI and misrepresentation extremely seriously. We will be looking at that as part of the task-force remit. There are also powers within the Online Safety Act, and we are certainly reflecting on the points mentioned by my noble friend because it is important that we have integrity in our elections. People need to understand what that integrity means. It does not mean deepfakes purporting to be somebody or something they are not.

My Lords, we are told that the Defending Democracy Taskforce will report in due course. Can the Minister guarantee to us that that report will be provided in good time for the May elections?

It is a continuing process and, as the noble Lord will know, the task force was established when his Government were in office and continues now. It is an ongoing process; we are looking at this and will produce lessons whenever they are forthcoming. In relation to the local elections in May, we have extended Operation Bridger, which gives support, if required, to Members of Parliament and Members of this House and key individuals who face elections in May. That operation, Operation Ford, is available to give support to individuals who face election at any time when parliamentary elections are not forthcoming.

My Lords, the Minister referred to the counterterrorism strategy. He will be aware that the Prevent strand of Contest has had very difficult and sometimes very poor press, perhaps as a result of misinterpretation of its objectives. Will the Minister tell us whether the intention is now to focus on safeguarding vulnerable individuals who are liable to be seduced by some of the materials that are available online and therefore prevent them being drawn into violent extremism of one sort or another? This should be a safeguarding approach rather than one that is seen as the pursuit of potential terrorists.

I hope I can help my noble friend by saying that there is a dual approach to this. Safeguarding is obviously important. There are many young people who can be drawn into potential terrorist activity at a very early age, and it is important that we treat those people as young people but also recognise the influences given to them. The Government’s Prevent strategy is also about making sure that we identify where serious intervention is needed to prevent potential radicalisation. We keep all those options open. That is important because we do not want to create a cadre of future terrorists, be they from whatever wing of terrorism activity. I have seen and witnessed young people who have had extreme right-wing, Islamist and other forms of radicalisation against gay and homosexual individuals. None of that is acceptable, and we need to identify how we best intervene to prevent that activity occurring.

My Lords, with the development of AI and social media, is the Minister satisfied that the present defamation laws in this country are adequate to deal with those threats?

If the noble Lord will allow me, I cannot confess at this Dispatch Box to be an expert on current defamation laws, but I understand, potentially, where he is coming from on this issue. Let me just say that everybody is entitled to freedom of speech and to their view, but when lies and mistruths are portrayed by individuals, it is right and proper that individuals respond in a robust and effective fashion. That is what this Government intend to do in relation to any lies portrayed against individuals or members of the United Kingdom as a whole.

My Lords, we expended a considerable amount of effort on reducing the caliphate and destroying Daesh or—as it prefers to be called—ISIL, but because of events in Syria we have to reassess where we stand. Have we done a reassessment of how we see ISIL? Do we think it will reform? What work is being done in that area?

I pay tribute to my noble friend’s experience in this area when he held the post in the previous Government. We will keep under examination the impact of the changes in Syria. We are doing that as a whole in terms of geopolitical responses and also in terms of individuals who are leaving Syria or staying in Syria. We need to make an assessment of that. It is very early days. We will continue to monitor that, and I will take on board the points that my noble friend mentioned.

My Lords, in regard to countering radicalisation, what discussions are the Government having with United States authorities to learn any relevant lessons from the recent dreadful events in New Orleans?

I say on behalf of the Government that we condemn the events in New Orleans and, indeed, the events that took place in Germany over the period. Those types of events can happen any time, any place, anywhere. That is why it is extremely important that we use the basis of the Five Eyes to support that intelligence-led operation and look at how we monitor and intervene in potential terrorist activity and track it. We also need to look at co-operation to identify the reasons why people are being radicalised. I say to the noble and gallant Lord that it is very difficult to identify individuals who are what we term “lone wolves”. There is an organised structure, which my noble friend Lord West mentioned, but there are also lone wolves who are radicalised. The Government are alive to both issues and will continue to be on top of them. We will put the security of this country and of our partners at the forefront of our operations.