The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 protects consumers from unfair trading practices and prohibits traders, including estate agents, from omitting (or providing unclear, untimely or obscure) material information to consumers in any ‘invitation to purchase’.

The Act strengthens consumer law enforcement by giving the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) new administrative powers, and the CMA and courts the ability to impose significant monetary penalties of up to 10% of turnover.

The CMA has issued updated guidance on price transparency and unfair commercial practices to help businesses comply.

In addition, since 1 October 2008 all estate agents in the UK who engage in residential estate agency work are required to belong to an approved redress scheme, either the Property Ombudsman or the Property Redress Scheme. This is a requirement of the Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Act 2007.

UK law is clear: it is an offence to produce, store, share or search for any material that contains or depicts child sexual abuse, regardless of whether the material is AI generated or not. Any suspected instances of blackmail or extortion linked to the misuse of images should be reported to the police so appropriate action can be taken.

The Online Safety Act requires platforms to prevent and swiftly remove illegal content, including child sexual abuse material, and introduces new offences targeting AI tools designed to generate such abuse.

Information is available in the 'Keeping children safe in education' (KCSIE) statutory guidance, which is available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/keeping-children-safe-in-education--2.

This guidance sets clear expectations to protect pupils from exploitation. We are proposing strengthened cyber security content and signposting to resources such as the National Crime Agency’s Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) guidance on sexual extortion in KCSIE 2026. We also provide guidance to help schools apply data protection legislation, details of which are available at:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/data-protection-in-schools/taking-and-using-photos-and-videos-and-using-cctv-in-schools.

The retention and deletion of custody images is currently governed by the statutory Police and Information Management Code of Practice, and the associated College of Policing’s Management of Police Information (MoPI) guidance and Authorised Professional Practice. These require forces to retain images only where necessary and proportionate and to review and delete them in line with assessed continuing policing need. Individuals are also able to apply to the police to have their custody image deleted, where they believe continued retention is not necessary.

The Government intends to bring forward a new legal framework to underpin law enforcement use of biometrics.

The Home Office does not hold data on whether the people in the gallery of custody images on the Police National Database have been charged or convicted.

The Ministry of Defence is eager to facilitate more engagement with Parliamentarians, and we are proactively doing so given the importance of Defence within the national conversation. Defence Ministers are committed to ensuring the Department is being more transparent and engaged with MPs from all parties, supporting visits to sites across the UK to meet our brave Service men and women.

Parliamentarians can seek approval to visit an establishment, including requests for media or photography in advance, and these are approved on a case-by-case basis noting security protocols and sensitivities. The most effective route remains to contact the Parliamentary Engagement Lead for the relevant Service in the first instance. Constituency MPs or MPs for immediately neighbouring constituencies may arrange visits directly with local establishments.

The retention and deletion of custody images is currently governed by the statutory Police and Information Management Code of Practice, and the associated College of Policing’s Management of Police Information (MoPI) guidance and Authorised Professional Practice. These require forces to retain images only where necessary and proportionate and to review and delete them in line with assessed continuing policing need. Individuals are also able to apply to the police to have their custody image deleted, where they believe continued retention is not necessary.

Following the recent public consultation on biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies, the government intends to bring forward a new legal framework covering biometric retention rules.

The Home Office has not made a final assessment of the cost‑effectiveness of police use of live facial recognition (LFR) technology in comparison to traditional policing methods. However, when the government introduces legislation on a new framework this will be accompanied by an impact assessment. This will include consideration of costs, operational benefits and wider impacts, alongside legal, ethical and equality considerations.

With regards to the integration of facial recognition into existing CCTV, police forces must comply with data protection, human rights, equality and other relevant laws. This means that police can use live facial recognition only for targeted, intelligence led, time-bound deployments to locate specific individuals on a watchlist, such as wanted offenders or people who may pose a risk of serious harm.

The Home Office is aware that both the Metropolitan Police and South Wales Police have piloted the use of facial recognition cameras mounted on fixed street infrastructure. This involves adding standalone LFR cameras and does not involve changing the use of existing CCTV, which remains separate.

Our landmark consultation on measures to protect children and enrich their online wellbeing launched on 2^nd March. This is open to the public, industry and civil society to respond to. We have also published parent and child versions to ensure all voices are reflected.

Measures in the consultation include implementing a minimum age to access certain social media and gaming platforms and limiting children’s access to ‘risky’ functionalities like livestreaming, location sharing and connecting with strangers. Respondents have the opportunity to list any other features they think should be age-restricted, which could include children’s public profile images and biographical information.

The consultation closes on 26 May. We will respond by the summer.

No such guidance has been given to departments.

To help companies comply with their duties under the Online Safety Act, Ofcom published guidance on the risks of illegal content and content to children as part of the Illegal Content Codes and Protection of Children Codes. The guidance notes the risks associated with children’s public profiles, such as abusive and hateful content, and the impact on different age groups. Service must refer to this guidance when implementing measures to protect children online.

We are launching a consultation to gather evidence to understand how best we can build on these provisions to ensure children have positive, enriched digital lives.

Inclusion is at the heart of GOV.UK One Login. The service provides multiple ways for users to prove their identity, including a no photo ID route which involves answering security questions.

GDS regularly tests designs with disabled users, including visually impaired users, where tests are performed with assistive technology.Our accessibility statement is available at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/govuk-one-login-app-accessibility-statement.

We have a Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) assessment, which examines the impacts of the service on the different protected characteristics and establishes mitigations where necessary.

Passport photographs are not being enrolled into biometric databases accessible for live facial recognition searches. However, His Majesty’s Passport Office (HMPO) may conduct retrospective facial recognition searches against the passport database, on behalf of police forces, in relation to serious cases e.g. sexual offences, violent offences, serious and organised crime, or those that are of a national security interest. Guidance on this practice, and an Equality Impact Assessment has been published on the GOV.UK site.

When deploying facial recognition technology, police forces must comply with existing legislation including the Human Rights Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, Data Protection Act 2018, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, as well as their own published policies. For live facial recognition, police forces must also follow the College of Policing’s Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on Live Facial Recognition. Forces also need to comply with the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice, which is supplemented by published policing policies.

On 4 December the Government launched a consultation on law enforcement use of biometrics, facial recognition and similar technologies. We are consulting on a new legal framework to create consistent, durable rules and appropriate safeguards for biometrics and facial recognition. This framework will aim to strike the right balance between public protection and privacy.

Voluntary interviews are used to question a person who is not under arrest about their suspected involvement in a criminal offence, particularly in cases where the legal threshold for arrest is not met. The decision to voluntarily interview a suspect rests with the police and there are a number of factors which must be considered when making this decision including the needs of the investigation, the necessity to arrest, potential vulnerability of the suspect, and any relevant risk factors. Where the statutory conditions for arrest are met, police should always consider whether voluntary interview or arrest would be the most appropriate approach.

The Home Office is aware of concerns raised about the use of voluntary attendance and the impact of this on the taking and retention of custody photographs and biometrics. Work is underway to ensure voluntary attendance is used appropriately by the police, especially in relation to sexual offences and options are being considered to increase capture of custody images and biometrics in future.

It is important to note that nothing in law or in the relevant statutory codes of practice prevents police from photographing suspects who attend for a voluntary interview, although force may not be used to achieve this while the suspect is not under arrest. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) provides guidance to forces on voluntary interviews which makes clear that it is good practice to photograph suspects attending voluntarily, not least because the photograph may be required for further confirmation of identity if the suspect is subsequently required to return to the police station for biometric samples (fingerprints and DNA), to be recorded after charge or conviction.

The Home Office collects and publishes data on police custody and voluntary interviews as part of the ‘Police Powers and Procedures’ statistical series, available here: Police powers and procedures England and Wales statistics - GOV.UK However this data set does not include statistics on the number of suspects whose photographs are taken in custody.

Voluntary interviews are used to question a person who is not under arrest about their suspected involvement in a criminal offence, particularly in cases where the legal threshold for arrest is not met. The decision to voluntarily interview a suspect rests with the police and there are a number of factors which must be considered when making this decision including the needs of the investigation, the necessity to arrest, potential vulnerability of the suspect, and any relevant risk factors. Where the statutory conditions for arrest are met, police should always consider whether voluntary interview or arrest would be the most appropriate approach.

The Home Office is aware of concerns raised about the use of voluntary attendance and the impact of this on the taking and retention of custody photographs and biometrics. Work is underway to ensure voluntary attendance is used appropriately by the police, especially in relation to sexual offences and options are being considered to increase capture of custody images and biometrics in future.

It is important to note that nothing in law or in the relevant statutory codes of practice prevents police from photographing suspects who attend for a voluntary interview, although force may not be used to achieve this while the suspect is not under arrest. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) provides guidance to forces on voluntary interviews which makes clear that it is good practice to photograph suspects attending voluntarily, not least because the photograph may be required for further confirmation of identity if the suspect is subsequently required to return to the police station for biometric samples (fingerprints and DNA), to be recorded after charge or conviction.

The Home Office collects and publishes data on police custody and voluntary interviews as part of the ‘Police Powers and Procedures’ statistical series, available here: Police powers and procedures England and Wales statistics - GOV.UK However this data set does not include statistics on the number of suspects whose photographs are taken in custody.

Voluntary interviews are used to question a person who is not under arrest about their suspected involvement in a criminal offence, particularly in cases where the legal threshold for arrest is not met. The decision to voluntarily interview a suspect rests with the police and there are a number of factors which must be considered when making this decision including the needs of the investigation, the necessity to arrest, potential vulnerability of the suspect, and any relevant risk factors. Where the statutory conditions for arrest are met, police should always consider whether voluntary interview or arrest would be the most appropriate approach.

The Home Office is aware of concerns raised about the use of voluntary attendance and the impact of this on the taking and retention of custody photographs and biometrics. Work is underway to ensure voluntary attendance is used appropriately by the police, especially in relation to sexual offences and options are being considered to increase capture of custody images and biometrics in future.

It is important to note that nothing in law or in the relevant statutory codes of practice prevents police from photographing suspects who attend for a voluntary interview, although force may not be used to achieve this while the suspect is not under arrest. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) provides guidance to forces on voluntary interviews which makes clear that it is good practice to photograph suspects attending voluntarily, not least because the photograph may be required for further confirmation of identity if the suspect is subsequently required to return to the police station for biometric samples (fingerprints and DNA), to be recorded after charge or conviction.

The Home Office collects and publishes data on police custody and voluntary interviews as part of the ‘Police Powers and Procedures’ statistical series, available here: Police powers and procedures England and Wales statistics - GOV.UK However this data set does not include statistics on the number of suspects whose photographs are taken in custody.

Voluntary interviews are used to question a person who is not under arrest about their suspected involvement in a criminal offence, particularly in cases where the legal threshold for arrest is not met. The decision to voluntarily interview a suspect rests with the police and there are a number of factors which must be considered when making this decision including the needs of the investigation, the necessity to arrest, potential vulnerability of the suspect, and any relevant risk factors. Where the statutory conditions for arrest are met, police should always consider whether voluntary interview or arrest would be the most appropriate approach.

The Home Office is aware of concerns raised about the use of voluntary attendance and the impact of this on the taking and retention of custody photographs and biometrics. Work is underway to ensure voluntary attendance is used appropriately by the police, especially in relation to sexual offences and options are being considered to increase capture of custody images and biometrics in future.

It is important to note that nothing in law or in the relevant statutory codes of practice prevents police from photographing suspects who attend for a voluntary interview, although force may not be used to achieve this while the suspect is not under arrest. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) provides guidance to forces on voluntary interviews which makes clear that it is good practice to photograph suspects attending voluntarily, not least because the photograph may be required for further confirmation of identity if the suspect is subsequently required to return to the police station for biometric samples (fingerprints and DNA), to be recorded after charge or conviction.

The Home Office collects and publishes data on police custody and voluntary interviews as part of the ‘Police Powers and Procedures’ statistical series, available here: Police powers and procedures England and Wales statistics - GOV.UK However this data set does not include statistics on the number of suspects whose photographs are taken in custody.