To ask His Majesty’s Government what recent progress the Defending Democracy Taskforce has made on protecting democratic institutions.

The taskforce is driving forward a whole-of-government response to the threats to our democratic institutions. Recent progress includes developing new legislation to address the abhorrent harassment and intimidation experienced by elected representatives, the provision of personal cyber security advice, and the rollout of new National Protective Security Authority guidance to help protect those working in our democracy.

My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister. It seems wholly appropriate to have a Question this afternoon on defending democracy and democratic elections, although that is, of course, entirely coincidental. The Defending Democracy Taskforce is the main mechanism for tackling foreign interference in our elections. It is concerning that there has been no action to date by ofcom under the foreign interference offence in the Online Safety Act. In this fast-moving arena, will my noble friend the Minister consider enhancing the status of the Defending Democracy Taskforce by bringing an annual Statement to Parliament about its work and key findings, and, as a signal of intent prior to any elections, consider publishing an overview of key threats identified to date to the UK’s electoral processes?

My noble friend makes some valuable points. The Security Minister, the honourable Dan Jarvis, has already announced in November that he is co-ordinating a cross-government, counterpolitical interference and espionage action plan, which will report back to Parliament, in due course, from Ministers across government. A significant number of achievements have been made to date. I will take away my noble friend’s suggestions and report back to her in due course.

My Lords, on 30 July, the Joint Committee on Human Rights published its report on transnational repression. Can the Minister tell us what weight he attaches to its conclusion that the UK has become a hunting ground for authoritarian regimes around the world to harass and intimidate, and its finding that the Government are failing to provide adequate protections? In particular, what has he got to say about those Hong Kong residents in the UK, such as Chloe Cheung, aged 20, who has had a 1 million Hong Kong dollar bounty placed on her head? What does he have to say about the evidence we received about Iranian pro-democracy activists in the United Kingdom, who have even had their lives put at risk by Iranian state agents?

It is not acceptable for foreign nations to threaten individuals who happen to reside in the United Kingdom, and I condemn any actions taken by foreign nations to do that. As I have said to the noble Lord on a number of occasions previously, if there are particular individuals who wish to draw concerns to the attention of the Home Office, we will examine those concerns and look at how we can protect those individuals.

My Lords, following on from the last question, the Defending Democracy Taskforce has the explicit aim of protecting the democratic integrity of the United Kingdom. Given that Reform UK’s former leader in Wales has been sentenced for taking bribes from Russia, and that Iranian bots have been found to be behind thousands of pro-Scottish independence social media accounts, what are the Government doing—indeed, what can they do—to deal with and counter such threats to the integrity of the union by the Russian and Iranian regimes?

Mr Gill is in prison now because the counterterrorism police of the security services in the United Kingdom brought evidence together, sufficient for prosecution, which proved he was acting as a traitor to this country by promoting information on behalf of a foreign nation and that he had taken money to do that. That is not acceptable and should send a warning to all who would potentially undertake that type of activity in the future. We keep under constant review potential threats and misinformation. We will continue to take action through the Online Safety Act and the review that my Honourable Friend the Security Minister is currently undertaking. Foreign interference in our democratic process is not acceptable and Mr Gill’s jail sentence is evidence that we will take action.

My Lords, I understand why some of the investigations that the Defending Democracy Taskforce is undertaking have to be kept highly confidential, but if we are going to defend democracy effectively, the public and parliamentarians need to be well informed as to the nature of the threats. I understand that Sir Philip Rycroft’s review of foreign financial influence and interference in UK elections, due in March, is to be presented to the Security Minister. Before this House has the elections Bill, which we expect in the next few months, it would be helpful for us to be informed as fully as possible of what that report says. If much of it is not allowed to be published for the public, can parliamentarians at least have as full a briefing as possible?

It is important that any information that comes from Sir Philip Rycroft’s review or from the separate review from the Security Minister is analysed. There will always obviously be restrictions on the information we can put into the public domain, but I will take away what the noble Lord has requested and find a mechanism to ensure that, for the information we can put into the public domain, that is done.

My Lords, can my noble friend the Minister assure me that the Government are looking carefully at the election monitoring work of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, especially with regard to combatting foreign interference? I am sure that a lot of this work needs to be done and co-ordinated on an international level. Can he further assure me that, if legislation is needed, which I think it will be, it can be introduced quickly so that it can be effective by the next General Election?

My noble friend is right to say that those who help support election monitoring overseas do a valuable job. I know that she has recently been undertaking election monitoring in Moldova. It is extremely important that the integrity of elections, not just in the United Kingdom, is maintained in the face of threats on the ground and disinformation. We are examining whether legislation is required, which my Honourable Friend the Security Minister is currently undertaking. If there are areas where action is needed, it is important that we address those speedily.

My Lords, the Minister and the House will know from the media—it was reported in the press last week—about the threats of intimidation and serious violence that were aimed at the former Labour MP for Blackburn, Kate Hollern, by supporters of the victorious candidate in the General Election in July 2024. What steps is the taskforce taking to address intimidation of elected representatives, particularly where such activity may be linked to extremist groups or foreign influencers?

The noble Lord will know that, first and foremost, we are taking measures through the police and crime Bill to protect the homes of elected and public figures, even such as Members of the House of Lords, from that level of intimidation and protest. We will examine the allegations that have been made by Kate Hollern in relation to the activity in Blackburn. It is important that, for the sake of democracy as a whole, individuals are entitled to put forward their ideas free of intimidation and threat. There is existing legislation in place to tackle that. This matter has come to light just in the last week, so we will need to reflect upon it.

My Lords, there are indeed horrifying examples of abuse being directed at elected representatives. I was pleased last month to have been elected as co-chair of the All-party Parliamentary Group for Defending Democracy, and I urge everyone in this House, particularly the noble Baroness, to join and play an active role. Will the Minister pledge that he and his colleagues, particularly the Security Minister, will use the new APPG as a way of engaging with parliamentarians across the House on these vital issues?

I welcome the all-party parliamentary group and the fact that the noble Lord is one of the officers, along with Nick Timothy, Member of Parliament for West Suffolk, and John Slinger, who is a Labour Back-Bench Member of Parliament. It is extremely important that the all-party group contributes to the debate, looks at where the Government need to improve performance and holds them to account for their performance on these areas. We have a common interest in protecting the security of Members and protecting electoral processes.

My Lords, given the recent warnings to parliamentarians about Chinese intelligence officers seeking to cultivate relationships with them, and the evidence that we have of Chinese agents paying people who work for MPs, would it not be appropriate to rule out permission for the huge Chinese embassy, which may act as a centre for spying operations, undermining democracy in this country and threatening citizens of other countries who campaign for democracy?

The noble Lord will know that there is a judicial process ongoing about the application for the new embassy for the Chinese authority. As part of that ongoing discussion, the Home Office and security services have been consulted. There will be an outcome, but that outcome has not yet been made, and the noble Lord tempts me to opine on matters which are still under consideration pending legal discussion. I cannot offer him any solution today, except to say that it is absolutely vital that any foreign country knows that the UK Government will not accept the type of influence that he has mentioned.