At the time of previous responses, the Home Office Social Media Team understood that it held a standard verified government account and did not subscribe to, or pay for, X Premium.

Subsequent checks of the account's billing and subscription history have established that the Home Office does not pay for Premium services, but that the account has been provided with complimentary Premium status by X at no cost to the department because it is a government Department.

The settlement of election claims depends on a range of factors, including the timing of claim submissions and the resolution of queries arising during the scrutiny process.

As of 15 July 2026, approximately 125 claims relating to the 2024 Police and Crime Commissioner elections and 600 claims relating to the 2024 UK Parliamentary General Election remain outstanding.

As set out previously, Returning Officers are not required to meet election costs upfront or wait until claims are settled before receiving funding. An advance payment, typically equivalent to 75% of the estimated cost of the poll, is issued ahead of the election.

The Department continues to work with Returning Officers to resolve outstanding queries and settle claims as promptly as possible.

The Ministry of Defence has not entered into any contracts with X and has no recorded contract expenditure with the company.

X is used solely to communicate with the public. A small annual cost of less than £100 is incurred where a channel requires a Premium subscription. The number of paid for X Premium accounts and the overall cost is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The MOD central communications team has one X Premium account which is paid for annually to support the management and operation of the official @DefenceHQ channel.

The power in clause 49 of the Representation of the People Bill is intended to support the provision of election-related information to electors, including information about elections and referendums in their area, candidates standing for election and polling station locations. Government discussions with the Electoral Commission on the use of this power have therefore focused on how best to improve access to this information for voters. They have not focused on requirements for the publication of official turnout figures for local contests.

The grey tick logo on the UK Home Office account on X signifies it as a verified government account, not a Premium paid-for account.

The Home Office social media team has not paid for, or been granted for free, any X Premium accounts.

As I said to the noble Earl, Lord Kinnoull, Report and Third Reading of the Representation of the People Bill will take place as soon as parliamentary time allows. I am not the Minister directly responsible for that Bill, but I will pass on the noble Lord’s comments. I hope that I share with the noble Lord the aspiration of ensuring that we put as tight a ring as possible around those donations, so that there is transparency, clarity and openness, and so that, if any amendments are made, the National Crime Agency has the independent policing ability to follow through.

The Terms of Reference for the Independent Review of Non-Corporate Communications Channels were published in full on 2 June on the Government website and are reproduced here for the benefit of their Lordships’ House:

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW INTO THE USE OF NON-CORPORATE COMMUNICATION CHANNELS IN THE UK GOVERNMENT

Purpose of Review

1. To examine the use of ‘non-corporate communications channels’ (NCCCs) within the UK government.

2. To consider the behavioural, organisational, legal, and technological factors affecting the use of NCCCs.

3. To make practical recommendations concerning NCCC use with the aim of improving the quality, security, propriety, effectiveness, and efficiency of government decision-making and record-keeping.

Background

The current lack of clarity on the use of NCCCs within Government raises concerns about information security practices, transparency and record keeping. These concerns engage with the Government’s legal obligations and standards of conduct.

Scope & Definition

The communication behaviours and practices of all UK Ministers, Special Advisers and Civil Servants concerning Government business are within scope, as are the related behavioural, organisational, legal, and technological factors. Where appropriate, this will include communications with wider public sector officials, although the communications of local government and other public sector bodies are generally out of scope. The review will provide a formal definition of NCCCs. However, for the purposes of these Terms of Reference, NCCCs are defined as any means of communication (generally, but not exclusively, textual) not provided for by HMG, and that might be personally owned, externally hosted or managed.

● The review is to gather and consider evidence of actual NCCC practice, including but not restricted to:

○ patterns of use, misuse and abuse, at all levels

○ communications with external partners (domestic and international)

○ crisis communications

○ record creation, retention, deletion and disclosure, including the use of auto-deletion features

○ assessment of the quality and provision of guidance and training

○ threats posed to the security and integrity of Government communications, including interception or device compromise by hostile actors and risks arising from the jurisdiction in which platform data is held

● The review should consider the following in making its recommendations:

○ how to reduce the risk of data loss and data leaks through the use of NCCCs

○ the incentives and disincentives to good behaviour (e.g: discipline, Codes of Conduct, etc.)

○ the communications channels that are available on official systems and the impact on the use of NCCCs as alternatives

○ any necessary changes to the policy and accountability framework for NCCCs and information security

○ options for improving guidance and training on NCCCs and information security ○ how to preserve the legitimate operational benefits of fast, informal communication whilst managing the associated risks

○ the likely impact of recommendations on the efficiency and effectiveness of government business

○ the views of the Information Commissioner and the Keeper of Public Records.

Leadership and Governance

This is to be an independent review, conducted by a qualified senior public figure supported by a small team of serving officials. The lead reviewer will make a written report of their findings and recommendations to the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Security Minister jointly, copying the Prime Minister.

Timings

The reviewer will report in early 2027. The Government will publish the Review’s findings and present the Government’s response to Parliament in due course thereafter.

Method

This will be determined by the lead reviewer, but the review team will be expected to make use of previous reviews and studies, the technical literature, structured interviews, data analysis, observational studies, surveys in preparing their findings and recommendations. The review will also consider suitable international comparators and models of best practice drawn from other corporate settings. The review will be informed and, as appropriate, illustrated by specific examples of NCCC use.

The Postcode Address File is a privately-owned dataset. Ofcom’s regulations require Royal Mail to provide access to the Postcode Address File on reasonable terms.

Ministers and officials have regular discussions with Ofcom in its capacity as the independent regulator of postal services. If there were matters relevant to the Postcode Address File, they would be discussed in this forum.

The Commercial Playbooks require departments to publish key performance indicators (KPIs) on their most important contracts. Within the data generated through this mechanism, across the last 16 quarters, the average percentage of published KPIs with inadequate ratings on Capita contracts across all departments was 9%. 'Inadequate' is the lowest rating.

Decisions regarding subscriptions and the use of platform features are taken by individual teams within departments, and are not centrally managed.

Decisions regarding subscriptions and the use of platform features are taken by individual teams within departments, and are not centrally managed.

I wonder who the noble Lord is talking about. He will be very aware that we have to operate within a contractual framework; we follow the rules and always will, but he raises an incredibly important point. The way in which we procure all contracts has to be considered in the round. That is why we are changing the social value test to make sure that other factors beyond pure cost are considered as part of any negotiations. But also, as the world changes, we are making sure that appropriate AI tools and others are used not only as part of the contracts but to deliver on the contracts too—they are used by government as well as by our contractors.

The Joint Election Security and Preparedness (JESP) Unit is a permanent function which sits jointly between Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), dedicated to protecting UK elections and referendums and coordinating work across government to respond to issues including protective security, cyber threats and mis and disinformation, and foreign interference as they emerge. During election periods, where appropriate, JESP may stand up an election cell to monitor and respond to security incidents as they emerge.

The UK’s elections, both national and local, remain safe and effective. However, it is clear that the threats to democracy continue to evolve and JESP is working with government partners and key stakeholders towards building capabilities and knowledge across election security ahead of future elections.

The Government Communication Service brand guidance recommends a stylistic layout, but staff may add additional information where they see fit.

Examples of the stylistic layout are:

• Name (in Helvetica Bold)
• Job Title (in Helvetica Bold)
• Unit and Department (in Helvetica Neue)
• Location (optional, in Helvetica Neue)
• Telephone Number (optional, in Helvetica Neue)
• Departmental Logo landscape

This guidance was last revised in October 2024 and is subject to continual review.

The usual procedures within the Department were followed with S.I. 2026/368 and the correct version of the S.I. was signed by the Minister.

However, during the drafting process several versions of the S.I. were created to correct several minor formatting issues, and on examination an incorrect version of the S.I. was then laid before Parliament and published. Whilst the Lawmaker software used to draft S.I.s system may have contributed to the generation of multiple versions of the S.I., it was human error that led to the failure.

The Department has taken steps to address these issues, and has also reviewed improvements to the process to ensure that the version that is sent for registration is clearly identified and confirmed as the correct version.

Returning Officers are responsible for publishing election results in their local areas and the Government has no current plans to introduce a uniform approach to the publication of local election results by local authorities.

The intention of the power is to improve the availability and consistency of election related information. The Government is working with the Electoral Commission to consider how this power can best support practical improvements to elector-facing information.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) has an auto emailer system, which is maintained and added by the Department's Digital, Technology and Security Directorate. This is customarily appended to all emails which are sent outside of the department and reads as follows:

Follow us online: www.gov.uk/fcdo

This email is intended for the addressee(s) only: All messages sent and received by the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office may be monitored in line with relevant UK legislation

There is separate guidance available for staff who wish to create their own email signatures, which was last updated by the Department's Communications Directorate on the 16 August 2023, but this does not dictate any mandatory wording to go alongside these signatures.

On 18 June 2026, the Government laid a fourth set of regulations. Subject to Parliamentary approval, these regulations will enact the changes made following the public consultation on the infected blood compensation scheme, and complete the Government’s response to the Inquiry’s July 2024 Additional Report.