04/11/2015

:01:52. > :01:57.Let me be clear, the draft Bill we are publishing today is not a return

:01:58. > :02:06.to the communications bill of 2 12, it will not introduce powers to

:02:07. > :02:14.allow them to detain Interndt traffic from third parties overseas,

:02:15. > :02:17.it will not... And it will not ban encryption or do anything to

:02:18. > :02:35.undermine the security of anyone's data. Today we are setting out a

:02:36. > :02:38.modern framework to set out powers in a clear way. A new bill that

:02:39. > :02:42.safeguards anywhere in the safeguards anywhere in the

:02:43. > :02:50.democratic world, and an approach that sets safeguards for

:02:51. > :02:52.transparency. It will underpin the work of law-enforcement and the

:02:53. > :02:56.Security intelligence agenches for years. It is there a licencd to

:02:57. > :03:01.operate. With the democratic approval of parliament, to protect

:03:02. > :03:04.national security and public safety. This bill responds to three

:03:05. > :03:21.independent review is to publish early this year. Three revidws made

:03:22. > :03:27.clear that the use of investigatory Powers is vital to protecting the

:03:28. > :03:29.public. They endorsed the powers available to the police and

:03:30. > :03:33.law-enforcement agencies is proportionate, and they agrded that

:03:34. > :03:36.the legal framework governing these powers needed updating. While

:03:37. > :03:44.considering those reviews, we have engaged with experts, acadelics

:03:45. > :03:48.civil liberties groups and service providers in the UK and overseas,

:03:49. > :04:21.and also charities overseeing people that the powers are used to

:04:22. > :04:33.investigate. Copies of the bill will be available in the vote office and

:04:34. > :04:41.the proposals will be subject to a further consultation and

:04:42. > :04:42.pre-legislative scrutiny by the committee of Parliament. It will be

:04:43. > :04:43.introduced in the spring, whll it will receive careful scrutiny. The

:04:44. > :04:43.means legislation will ceasd to have means legislation will ceasd to have

:04:44. > :04:44.effect from the 31st of September 2016, but our intention is to pass

:04:45. > :04:47.the new law before that datd. It will govern all the powers `vailable

:04:48. > :04:49.to one force wind, security and intelligence agencies and the Armed

:04:50. > :04:51.Forces to acquire communications data. These include the ability to

:04:52. > :04:53.retain communications data, to be used as evidence in court and to

:04:54. > :04:55.advance investigations, the ability to intercept the contents of

:04:56. > :04:57.communications to tackle terrorist plots and organised crimes. The use

:04:58. > :04:59.of powers by the security and intelligence agencies in bulk, to

:05:00. > :05:06.identify the most serious threats to the UK from overseas and to rapidly

:05:07. > :05:09.establish links between suspects in the UK. It cannot be right that the

:05:10. > :05:13.police could find an abductdd child of the suspects were using lobile

:05:14. > :05:19.phones, but if they were ushng social media they would be out of

:05:20. > :05:26.reach. Such an approach defhes all logic and ignores the reality of

:05:27. > :05:31.today's digital age. This Bhll will also allow the police to iddntify

:05:32. > :05:37.to, Internet connection records to, Internet connection records

:05:38. > :05:44.Some have characterised this power is law-enforcement having access to

:05:45. > :05:51.people's full web browsing. This is simply wrong. An intranet connection

:05:52. > :05:57.records as a record of the service we have used, not of every page they

:05:58. > :06:02.have accessed. The Internet connection record will only show

:06:03. > :06:12.that they have accessed a shte, not the particular pages.

:06:13. > :06:17.Law enforcement agencies wotld not be able to make a request for the

:06:18. > :06:22.purpose of determining, for example, whether someone had visited a mental

:06:23. > :06:25.health website, a medical wdbsite or even a news website. They would only

:06:26. > :06:29.be able to make a request for the purpose of determining whether

:06:30. > :06:33.someone had access to communications website, and illegal websitd or to

:06:34. > :06:37.resolve an IP address where it is necessary and proportionate to do so

:06:38. > :06:40.in the course of a specific investigation. Strict limits will

:06:41. > :06:44.apply to when and how that data can be accessed over and above those

:06:45. > :06:47.safeguards that apply to other forms of communications data and we will

:06:48. > :06:52.ban local authorities from `ccessing such data. I have announced today

:06:53. > :06:55.our intention to ensure that the powers available to law enforcement

:06:56. > :06:59.and the agencies are clear for everyone to understand and the

:07:00. > :07:02.transparency report that I'l publishing today will help, and

:07:03. > :07:07.copies of that report will be available in the vote officd. But

:07:08. > :07:10.there remain some powers th`t successive governments have

:07:11. > :07:12.considered too sensitive to disclose, for fear of revealing

:07:13. > :07:17.capabilities to those who wdan us harm. I'm clear that we must now

:07:18. > :07:20.reconcile this with our ambhtion to deliver greater openness and

:07:21. > :07:27.transparency. So the bill whll make explicit provision for all of the

:07:28. > :07:33.powers available to acquire data in bulk. That will include not only

:07:34. > :07:36.bulk interception provided tnder the regulation of investigatory Powers

:07:37. > :07:41.act, which is vital to the work of GCHQ, but also the bulk

:07:42. > :07:46.communications database rel`ting to the UK and overseas. It is not a new

:07:47. > :07:51.power but will replace the power under section 94 of the

:07:52. > :07:54.telecommunications act 1984, under which successive governments have

:07:55. > :07:58.approved the security and intelligence agencies' access to

:07:59. > :08:01.such communications data from communication service providers

:08:02. > :08:06.This has allowed them to thought a number of attacks here in the UK. In

:08:07. > :08:10.2010, when a group of terrorists were plotting attacks in thd UK

:08:11. > :08:13.including on the London stock exchange, the use of bulk

:08:14. > :08:17.communications data played ` key role in MI5's investigation. It

:08:18. > :08:21.allowed investigators to undercover the terrorist network and understand

:08:22. > :08:24.their plans. This led to thd destruction of their activities and

:08:25. > :08:29.successful convictions against all of the group's members. I'vd also

:08:30. > :08:32.published the agencies' handling arrangements are related to this

:08:33. > :08:36.power which set out the existing robust safeguards and indepdndent

:08:37. > :08:38.oversight. These make clear that the data does not include the content of

:08:39. > :08:42.communications or internet collection records. The bill will

:08:43. > :08:46.put this power on a more explicit footing and it will be subjdct to

:08:47. > :08:50.the same robust safeguards that apply to other bulk powers. The

:08:51. > :08:54.House will know that the powers I have described today are currently

:08:55. > :08:56.overseen by the interception of Communications Commissioner, the

:08:57. > :08:59.intelligence services Commissioner and the Chief surveillance

:09:00. > :09:02.Commissioner, all of whom are serving or former senior judges

:09:03. > :09:06.This regime worked in the p`st but I'm clear we need to have a

:09:07. > :09:10.significantly strengthened regime to govern how these powers are

:09:11. > :09:15.authorised and overseen, so we will replace the existing oversight with

:09:16. > :09:18.a powerful and independent investigatory Powers Commissioner.

:09:19. > :09:23.This will be a senior judge, supported by a team of expert

:09:24. > :09:25.inspectors with the authority and resources to effectively hold the

:09:26. > :09:28.intelligence agencies and l`w enforcement to account. These will

:09:29. > :09:34.be world leading oversight arrangements. Finally, I want to

:09:35. > :09:38.turn to authorisation. Authorising warrants is one of the most

:09:39. > :09:40.important means by which I `nd other secretaries of State hold the

:09:41. > :09:46.security and intelligence agencies to account for their actions. In

:09:47. > :09:50.turn, we are accountable to this House and, through its elected

:09:51. > :09:53.representatives, to the public. As the House knows, the first duty of

:09:54. > :09:57.government is the detection of the public and it is a responsibility

:09:58. > :10:03.this government takes extrelely seriously. -- protection of the

:10:04. > :10:06.public. All three reviews I have referenced which different

:10:07. > :10:09.conclusions on the question of who should authorise interception

:10:10. > :10:14.warrants. The intelligence `nd security committee authorisdd

:10:15. > :10:17.Woodman supported authorisation by the Secretary of State, Davhd

:10:18. > :10:20.Anderson said judges had Harriet authorisation and another rdport

:10:21. > :10:23.said there should be a judicial element but also recognise the

:10:24. > :10:27.important role of the Secretary of State. I considered the verx good

:10:28. > :10:33.arguments put forward by thd reviews and I hope the House will agree that

:10:34. > :10:37.my response provides the delocratic accountability and judicial

:10:38. > :10:40.accountability. So, as now, the Secretary of State will need to be

:10:41. > :10:43.satisfied that an activity hs necessary and proportionate before a

:10:44. > :10:47.warrant can be issued but in future, the warrant will not come

:10:48. > :10:52.into force until it has been formally approved by a judgd. This

:10:53. > :10:55.will place a double lock on the authorisation of our most intrusive

:10:56. > :10:59.investigatory powers. Democratic accountability through the Secretary

:11:00. > :11:04.of State to ensure our intelligence agencies operate in the intdrests of

:11:05. > :11:08.the citizens of this countrx and the public reassurance of indepdndent

:11:09. > :11:13.judicial authorisation. This will be one of the strongest authorhsation

:11:14. > :11:16.regimes anywhere in the world. And for parliamentarians, we will go

:11:17. > :11:20.even further. This bill will, for the first time, put into law the

:11:21. > :11:25.Prime Minister's commitment that in any case where it is proposdd to

:11:26. > :11:28.intercept the communications of a parliamentarian, including lembers

:11:29. > :11:33.of this House, members of the House of Lords, UK MEPs and members of the

:11:34. > :11:38.devolved legislators, the Prime Minister would also be constlted.

:11:39. > :11:44.The legislation we are proposing today is unprecedented. It will

:11:45. > :11:48.provide unparalleled openness and transparency about our investigatory

:11:49. > :11:52.powers. It will provide the strongest safeguards and word

:11:53. > :11:56.leading oversight arrangements and it will give the men and wolen of

:11:57. > :12:00.our security intelligence agencies and our law enforcement agencies,

:12:01. > :12:03.who do so much to keep us s`fe and secure, the powers they need to

:12:04. > :12:11.protect our country, and I commend this statement to the House. Mr Andy

:12:12. > :12:15.Burnham. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and can I welcome the Home Secrdtary's

:12:16. > :12:20.comprehensive and detailed statement, and the advance notice

:12:21. > :12:23.she has provided? Huge changes in technology have clearly left our law

:12:24. > :12:29.is outdated and made the job of the police and the security services

:12:30. > :12:33.harder. In a world where thd threats we face, internationally and

:12:34. > :12:36.domestic league, are growing, Parliament cannot sit on its hands

:12:37. > :12:41.and leave blind spots where the authorities can't see. This debate

:12:42. > :12:45.will be seen through the prhsm of extremism and terrorism but as the

:12:46. > :12:49.Home Secretary said, it is `bout much more. It is about shout sex

:12:50. > :12:54.works but Asian, serious online fraud and other important

:12:55. > :12:58.functions. -- about child sdxual exploitation. We support thd

:12:59. > :13:02.government in its attempt to update the law in its important and

:13:03. > :13:07.sensitive area and we share the government's goal of creating a

:13:08. > :13:11.world-class framework. But our position on these benches is clear.

:13:12. > :13:15.Strong powers must be balanced by strong safeguards for the ptblic, to

:13:16. > :13:20.protect privacy and long-held liberties. From what the Hole

:13:21. > :13:23.Secretary has said today, Mr Speaker, it seems clear to le that

:13:24. > :13:28.both she and the government have been listening carefully to the

:13:29. > :13:31.concerns that were expressed about the original legislation th`t was

:13:32. > :13:34.presented in the last Parli`ment. She has brought forward much

:13:35. > :13:41.stronger safeguards, partictlarly in the crucial area of judicial

:13:42. > :13:45.authorisation. And, Mr Speaker, I think it would help the futtre

:13:46. > :13:49.conduct of this important ptblic debate if this has sent out a

:13:50. > :13:58.unified message today that this is neither a smoothers' charter nor a

:13:59. > :14:03.plan for mass surveillance. -- a snoopers' charter. I would buy Deco

:14:04. > :14:07.the Home Secretary's thanks to the intelligence and Security committee

:14:08. > :14:12.and committed to David Anderson QC who has done the House a huge

:14:13. > :14:16.service in setting out the basis for eight consensus on these important

:14:17. > :14:21.matters. Can the Home Secretary tell us if David Anderson has expressed a

:14:22. > :14:25.view on her draft bill, whether he supports the measures contahned

:14:26. > :14:30.within it and if he is satisfied with the checks and balances on

:14:31. > :14:35.powers and safeguards? The House will want reassurance that this bill

:14:36. > :14:38.carries forward some of the safeguards of previous legislation,

:14:39. > :14:42.particularly the ripple leghslation, particularly in relation to the

:14:43. > :14:47.threshold of the use of the most intrusive powers. So can shd assure

:14:48. > :14:51.the House that the far-reaching powers of content intercepthon will

:14:52. > :14:55.only be used for the most sdrious of crimes, as it was in the orhginal

:14:56. > :14:58.legislation? We welcome what the Home Secretary has said abott

:14:59. > :15:02.internet connection records and local authorities but the House will

:15:03. > :15:08.have been listening carefully to what she had to say about d`ta

:15:09. > :15:12.retention and bulk storage. On the issue of data retention by the

:15:13. > :15:16.authorities, can she say more about what kind of data will be stored,

:15:17. > :15:21.for how long and whether thd information will be held in anon I

:15:22. > :15:25.is for? This is important bdcause public concern in this area will

:15:26. > :15:31.have risen following the attack on data held by talk talk and H think

:15:32. > :15:33.she said at the beginning of her statement, 90% of commercial

:15:34. > :15:39.organisations have experienced a data breach, so people will have

:15:40. > :15:43.listened to that. What lessons has she jaunt from that attack `nd does

:15:44. > :15:46.she believe there is a need for the enhancement of security of bulk

:15:47. > :15:51.storage arrangements by both the public and private bodies? On

:15:52. > :15:54.encryption, the Prime Minister spoke some months ago about the

:15:55. > :15:58.possibility of introducing ` ban. Clearly that is not the polhcy that

:15:59. > :16:03.the Home Secretary has just outlined. Can she explained the

:16:04. > :16:05.reason for the change in approach? Alongside the proposals on

:16:06. > :16:10.encryption, it is clear that the bill would place a range of new

:16:11. > :16:14.legal duties on communication providers but can she tell the House

:16:15. > :16:17.whether all major providers support proposals, including those based

:16:18. > :16:20.overseas? I listened carefully to what she had to say on this point

:16:21. > :16:25.and she implied that the me`sures in this bill would not apply to

:16:26. > :16:28.organisations based overseas and that would seem to suggest that

:16:29. > :16:32.there is quite a large hole here that this legislation won't cover,

:16:33. > :16:37.so can she say more about that and reassure us on whether they will

:16:38. > :16:42.have a voluntary arrangements in that area? Can she also say whether

:16:43. > :16:45.these measures will apply to individuals, Mr Speaker, because we

:16:46. > :16:48.are seeing rapid change in the developed of online applications and

:16:49. > :16:51.we need to know whether indhviduals might be liable in this are`, too.

:16:52. > :16:55.The whole house will welcomd what she had to say about the Wilson

:16:56. > :16:58.doctrine but she didn't mention journalistic sources and can she say

:16:59. > :17:03.whether the legislation will provide protection there? I will return to

:17:04. > :17:06.the crucial area of authorisation. This was the key demand of ly

:17:07. > :17:10.predecessor and one that I have reiterated. We are pleased to see

:17:11. > :17:14.that the Home Secretary has listened. The 2-stage process she

:17:15. > :17:18.advocates seems to have the merit of both arguments, both of public and

:17:19. > :17:24.political accountability and of to build trust in the system. But there

:17:25. > :17:27.may be a worry that it might build in time delays. Can the Secretary of

:17:28. > :17:32.State say more about how thhs process would work in practhce and

:17:33. > :17:37.how those delays could be avoided? Will judge as a sign of warrants in

:17:38. > :17:40.all cases and can she say if the Secretary of State and the judge

:17:41. > :17:45.come to different conclusions, who will have the final say? Finally, Mr

:17:46. > :17:48.Speaker, as well as looking at the specific proposals in this bill it

:17:49. > :17:52.is important to look at the wider context in which they are

:17:53. > :17:55.introduced. She will know that there will be fierce in some commtnities,

:17:56. > :17:58.particularly the Muslim comlunity, that these powers will be used

:17:59. > :18:02.against them disproportionately and we have also seen in the past how

:18:03. > :18:06.police powers have been wrongly used against trade Unionist. Davhd

:18:07. > :18:11.Anderson rightly lay great dmphasis on the need to build trust `nd a new

:18:12. > :18:14.framework. It does not help create the right context when the Prime

:18:15. > :18:18.Minister suggests the entird Muslim community quietly condones

:18:19. > :18:21.extremism, nor does it build confidence in this new bill when, at

:18:22. > :18:25.the same time, the government is seeking to legislate in the trade

:18:26. > :18:27.union bill to impose new requirements on trade unionhsts on

:18:28. > :18:32.the use of social media and monitoring of it by police. As the

:18:33. > :18:39.right honourable member for halt price and Howden has said, this

:18:40. > :18:42.isn't Franco's Britain. Can Home Secretary see that continuing to

:18:43. > :18:45.build on the trust she has lade today, the government needs to drop

:18:46. > :18:51.some or of its divisive measures, starting with the measures hn the

:18:52. > :18:54.trades union bill? The issuds this proposed legislation seeks to tackle

:18:55. > :18:57.go way beyond party politics. Any government will face a diffhcult

:18:58. > :19:00.task of balancing the securhty of the nation with privacy and Liddy is

:19:01. > :19:05.of individual citizens and does somebody who was in the Homd Office

:19:06. > :19:10.on 9/11, I know that talent has got harder in recent years. We will

:19:11. > :19:13.examine the detail of the draft bill and safeguards to build trust but

:19:14. > :19:17.having listened carefully to what the Home Secretary had to s`y today,

:19:18. > :19:23.I believe she has responded to legitimate concerns and bro`dly got

:19:24. > :19:27.that difficult balance right. First of all, may I thank the right

:19:28. > :19:33.honourable gentleman for thd tone that he adopted in most of his

:19:34. > :19:38.response to my statement, and the clear, that he made, both of the

:19:39. > :19:40.willingness to understand and accept the importance of this legislation

:19:41. > :19:44.and that it is not mass surveillance. I think we sh`re that

:19:45. > :19:48.message and it should go out very clearly from this House tod`y. These

:19:49. > :19:52.are important powers that are necessary to keep us safe and secure

:19:53. > :19:55.but they should have the right safeguards, as The right honourable

:19:56. > :19:59.gentleman has said. He asked a lot of questions in his responsd so I

:20:00. > :20:02.will attempt and as many of them as possible but if I do miss any of

:20:03. > :20:06.them, I will respond him in writing. But before I come to the spdcific

:20:07. > :20:09.questions, I just want to address the issue of the reference he made

:20:10. > :20:13.to the Prime Minister at thd end of his speech, which I have to say to

:20:14. > :20:21.him was not, I think, justified by the rest of the town that hd had

:20:22. > :20:24.adopted in his speech. -- the tone. What we are doing our countdr

:20:25. > :20:28.extremism strategy, which is a strategy that deals with extremism

:20:29. > :20:32.of all sorts, Islamist extrdmism and neo-Nazi extremism, what we are

:20:33. > :20:37.saying very clearly is that we want to work with people, mainstream

:20:38. > :20:40.voices in communities, to hdlp to encourage those mainstream voices

:20:41. > :20:44.and to work with people to dnsure that where they are in isol`ted

:20:45. > :20:48.communities, will identify the barriers that cause that isolation

:20:49. > :20:54.and that's why Louise Casey is doing the very impertinent work that she

:20:55. > :20:56.is. So the characterisation of the prime lister's, it is not one that I

:20:57. > :21:43.recognise. Records will be required to be

:21:44. > :21:52.retained for up to 12 months. It is not about what pages people have

:21:53. > :22:02.been looking at, just access to a particular website or communication

:22:03. > :22:04.device. He asked about cyber attacks, and the message is very

:22:05. > :22:05.simple, that is criminals are moving into more online crime, we need to

:22:06. > :22:06.agencies have the power to be able agencies have the power to be able

:22:07. > :22:08.to deal with it and work in that to deal with it and work in that

:22:09. > :22:14.space, which is what today hs all about. On encryption, the

:22:15. > :22:17.requirement currently in secondary legislation, that those companies

:22:18. > :22:23.who are issued with a warrant should take reasonable steps to be able to

:22:24. > :22:32.respond to that in unencrypted form, is being brought into the face

:22:33. > :22:33.of legislation, but we're not banning encryption. Would rdcognise

:22:34. > :22:37.it plays an important part hn keeping the details secure. He asked

:22:38. > :22:39.about providers, and I think there about providers, and I think there

:22:40. > :22:47.may be a slight misunderstanding about overseas. There are some

:22:48. > :22:55.elements that we are not repuiring them to do, but it is still our view

:22:56. > :22:58.that a warrant is issued here should be able to be exercised agahnst an

:22:59. > :23:04.overseas provider. It is thd case that the work that a previots member

:23:05. > :23:11.did suggested that there was some scope for greater form of agreement

:23:12. > :23:16.in this area, which is a matter of the government will continud to look

:23:17. > :23:19.at. On journalistic sources, we will look into this legislation `sh boot

:23:20. > :23:27.into the legislation what wd put into the code earlier this xear

:23:28. > :23:33.which is for access for the journalist source, it will require

:23:34. > :23:36.authorisation, and the point of the double lock is that both parties

:23:37. > :23:41.have to authorise the warrant to authorise the warrant the go-ahead.

:23:42. > :23:45.There will be all urgency. Ht will be an urgent process, so it will be

:23:46. > :23:48.possible for the Secretary of State to sign a warrant for it to come

:23:49. > :23:52.immediately into effect and then there will be a period of thme

:23:53. > :23:56.within which the judge will have to review it and decide whether Richard

:23:57. > :24:00.continue or not. We will look to ensure that the time delay hs as

:24:01. > :24:06.little as possible between those parts of the process. But the

:24:07. > :24:12.purpose of a double lock is that there is double authorisation. -

:24:13. > :24:20.decide whether it should continue or not. I found myself in the judicial

:24:21. > :24:27.authorisation aspect of it. Will this replace all 66 statutory

:24:28. > :24:32.approval mechanisms for intdrcept and use of communication data? Will

:24:33. > :24:37.the judiciary who are involved in the procedures be appointed by the

:24:38. > :24:39.commission or by the Prime Minister? And will members of

:24:40. > :24:47.Parliament get the same protections she referred to on communic`tions

:24:48. > :24:49.data that are now being extdnded to journalists, because my

:24:50. > :24:54.understanding is that is not the case. Regarding the warrant subject

:24:55. > :25:05.to the double lock, it is the warrant tree which is currently it

:25:06. > :25:16.will in future have the double lock on it. We will be in discussion with

:25:17. > :25:21.the investigatory Powers Commissioner, after appointhng them,

:25:22. > :25:25.and then we will decide who should be under that commissioner, and the

:25:26. > :25:28.area of expertise they should have. I have said to the Justice Secretary

:25:29. > :25:32.in Scotland and the Minister in Northern Ireland that we wotld

:25:33. > :25:36.expect to ensure that Scotthsh legal expertise and Northern Irel`nd

:25:37. > :25:56.expertise are available to that Commissioner. Halas Bill on this

:25:57. > :26:17.important subject hit the btffers, but this Bill is a much improved

:26:18. > :26:21.model. Batch her last Bill. I do feel that it still retains some of

:26:22. > :26:24.the flaws of its predecessor. The the flaws of its predecessor. The

:26:25. > :26:33.Home Office has put in a lot of work, which I welcome, as I do the

:26:34. > :26:54.dropping of some of the key provisions on third-party d`ta and

:26:55. > :26:55.encryption. But I am still ` bit confused of the advanced brhefings

:26:56. > :26:55.on the bill, some of which suggest it is a rather cold departure from

:26:56. > :26:56.its predecessor, and others that much of it is still the samd. It

:26:57. > :26:57.the detail. The Home Secret`ry set the detail. The Home Secret`ry set

:26:58. > :26:57.out a somewhat complex double lock out a somewhat complex double lock

:26:58. > :26:58.compromise which may incur some compromise which may incur some

:26:59. > :26:58.faster to provide Ford direct faster to provide Ford direct

:26:59. > :26:58.judicial authorisation? Why has she not decided to do that? On

:26:59. > :27:03.browsing, I strongly welcomd what browsing, I strongly welcomd what

:27:04. > :27:10.looks like a more proportionate method. Finally cannot she tell the

:27:11. > :27:16.House will -- and she tell the House white there will not be a proper US

:27:17. > :27:25.style civil liberties board to provide scrutiny on these txpe of

:27:26. > :27:29.ills in the future? The right honourable gentleman, he sahd there

:27:30. > :27:31.was some confused briefing, but I would say there were some dhfferent

:27:32. > :27:36.reports in newspapers, which is not reports in newspapers, which is not

:27:37. > :27:39.necessarily the result of briefing, and it is the case that what is the

:27:40. > :27:45.situation in relation to thd Bill is what I have set out today. @nd that

:27:46. > :27:54.is what... The honourable l`dy says that I went on TV, yes, and I am

:27:55. > :27:58.relation to the difference of this relation to the difference of this

:27:59. > :28:03.bill from the draft Communications data Bill, that some of the more

:28:04. > :28:07.contentious elements are not in this Bill, so for example the repuirement

:28:08. > :28:10.for UK communication servicd providers to retain and accdss

:28:11. > :28:18.third-party data from other overseas providers, and web browsing issues

:28:19. > :28:24.are not in this. Neither ard the particular requirements that we were

:28:25. > :28:28.going to .2, the US and overseas communication service providers in

:28:29. > :28:35.terms of the detention of d`ta on the same obligations as UK

:28:36. > :28:39.judicial independence but also judicial independence but also

:28:40. > :28:44.public accountability. That is what you get through membership of this

:28:45. > :28:52.House. He speaks about retrospective data, I would give him the case of

:28:53. > :29:10.the abducted child. You want to see who that person was in cont`ct with,

:29:11. > :29:20.can do it on telephone records, but can do it on telephone records, but

:29:21. > :29:21.not if they were using soci`l media app. I welcome her statement and the

:29:22. > :29:23.will work and Security Commhttee will work and Security

:29:24. > :29:27.will work Corporation to provide will work Corporation to provide

:29:28. > :29:41.scrutiny for this. In March there were 54 specific recommendations. I

:29:42. > :29:42.appreciate that in part the draft appreciate that in part the draft

:29:43. > :29:43.those recommendations, but there is those recommendations, but there is

:29:44. > :29:44.a duty on the government to provide a specific response to the HSC

:29:45. > :29:44.honourable friend that in the course honourable friend that in the course

:29:45. > :29:46.of the next few weeks while this debate is taking place, the

:29:47. > :29:51.government should provide stch a response. It could be an short

:29:52. > :29:55.form, but it will enable thd House and the public to identify those

:29:56. > :29:59.the course of the debate and to the course of the debate and to

:30:00. > :30:04.identify what has been taken on board and what may have even

:30:05. > :30:11.properly rejected by the government. I would seek an assurance that that

:30:12. > :30:13.will happen. I thank him for his question. The Intelligence `nd

:30:14. > :30:19.Security Committee's report went wider than the issues we ard dealing

:30:20. > :30:20.with today in terms of investigatory Powers. But I can assure hil that in

:30:21. > :30:25.relation to those aspect whhch dealt relation to those aspect whhch dealt

:30:26. > :30:30.with the powers, in a sense the government's new bill is a response

:30:31. > :30:33.to the report, but he knows we have been looking carefully at the full

:30:34. > :30:38.set of recommendations from the previous ISC, and will respond to

:30:39. > :30:46.his committee in due course and in a timely fashion. I would likd to

:30:47. > :30:51.thank her for her statement today, and for the care that has bden taken

:30:52. > :30:54.to address many concerns rahsed I would also like to thank her for the

:30:55. > :30:56.conversations I have had with her and her ministers regarding the

:30:57. > :31:00.publication of the draft Bill. I would like to thank her for

:31:01. > :31:03.confirming that a member of the confirming that a member of the

:31:04. > :31:06.Scottish National Party will serve on the joint committee scrutinising

:31:07. > :31:12.the Bill. I am grateful for those comments and I would grateftl if she

:31:13. > :31:16.would confirm that she will continue to have an open door policy

:31:17. > :31:20.regarding this. While we have political differences, therd will be

:31:21. > :31:25.some political differences over the content of the draft Bill, `nd as

:31:26. > :31:32.the honourable member said, the devil is in the detail. But we can

:31:33. > :31:33.all agree that we have a responsibility to protect the right

:31:34. > :31:38.of our citizens while being realistic about the threats we face.

:31:39. > :31:43.We live in dangerous times with threats of conflict and an

:31:44. > :31:47.accelerating pace of technological change which is unfortunately often

:31:48. > :31:54.first embraced by those who intend harmful stop we should put on record

:31:55. > :31:57.our appreciation to those who are charged with keeping us safd, the

:31:58. > :32:04.police and intelligence services, but we should also thank calpaigning

:32:05. > :32:10.groups such as liberty and `mnesty who remind us why it is important to

:32:11. > :32:13.protect Civil Liberties. Thdy are protected at the cost of thd lives

:32:14. > :32:17.of great many people who we will remember this Remembrance Stnday.

:32:18. > :32:23.David Anderson said in his report that the law in this area w`s

:32:24. > :32:28.needing an overhaul and we needed a comprehensive local thing whth the

:32:29. > :32:34.changes of technology, but `lso takes into account human rights and

:32:35. > :32:45.Civil Liberties. Only time `nd careful scrutiny will show hf this

:32:46. > :32:46.happens, but I would like hdr to see that key aims will be met bx the

:32:47. > :32:49.Bill. Other countries are looking to Bill. Other countries are looking to

:32:50. > :32:56.what we do here, and it is hmportant what we do here, and it is hmportant

:32:57. > :32:56.we get it right. We believe that access to private communications

:32:57. > :33:00.must always be necessary, t`rgeted must always be necessary, t`rgeted

:33:01. > :33:05.and proportionate, and I wotld be grateful if she would confirm she

:33:06. > :33:18.agrees with us in that respdct. Safeguards are crucial,... Hn common

:33:19. > :33:23.the House, we hold the view that the House, we hold the view that

:33:24. > :33:41.judicial oversight and organisation of access may in large part be the

:33:42. > :33:53.answer the concerns. And we are concerned that if it is the Home

:33:54. > :33:55.Secretary's intention to proceed with the hybrid system

:33:56. > :33:55.both political and judicial both political and judicial

:33:56. > :33:56.might add an unnecessary laxer of might add an unnecessary laxer

:33:57. > :33:58.democracy and could lead to errors democracy and could lead to errors

:33:59. > :34:11.and delays in urgent situathons and I wondered if she can give ts any

:34:12. > :34:28.that she is indicating the that she is indicating the

:34:29. > :34:29.protection that will be put on a statutory footing, which will be put

:34:30. > :34:30.confirmed the scope of that confirmed the scope of that

:34:31. > :34:30.protection will also protect those protection will also protect those

:34:31. > :34:31.such as they are constituents and such as they are constituents and

:34:32. > :34:31.whistle-blowers, and there will be judicial oversight. Finally, this

:34:32. > :34:32.Bill concerns not only the hssues of national security, but issuds of the

:34:33. > :34:33.investigation of serious crhme, and it will accordingly impinge on areas

:34:34. > :34:41.Can she confirmed she is aw`re of Can she confirmed she is aw`re of

:34:42. > :34:49.that and that legislative consent motion will be required? I thank her

:34:50. > :34:52.for quite a number of questhons In for quite a number of questhons In

:34:53. > :34:56.relation to the point she m`de earlier, about the open door, I have

:34:57. > :35:01.this legislation, my offici`ls have this legislation, my offici`ls have

:35:02. > :35:04.been in touch with Scottish Government officials, and whll

:35:05. > :35:11.continue to be. I am aware this impinge is an aspect devolvdd to the

:35:12. > :35:19.Scottish Government, and in relation to the signature of one -- warrants.

:35:20. > :35:25.We will work with the Scotthsh Government to ensure that any

:35:26. > :35:26.legislation necessary, if one is necessary, and that is being worked

:35:27. > :35:36.through by officials. Particularly in the ass but she

:35:37. > :35:41.relates to in terms of the `ss but she relates to in terms of `

:35:42. > :35:46.specific issue that has been raised by the Scottish Government. We have

:35:47. > :35:50.every confidence that the processes we are putting in place will not add

:35:51. > :35:54.greater bureaucracy but will provide greater bureaucracy but will provide

:35:55. > :35:57.process by which the Secret`ry of process by which the Secret`ry of

:35:58. > :36:02.State can authorise a warrant to go into place immediately with a speedy

:36:03. > :36:07.review by the judge to ensure that there is still that authorisation.

:36:08. > :36:09.She asked if the aims of David Anderson, particularly in rdlation

:36:10. > :36:16.to a comprehensibility legislation, had been met. I have to say that I

:36:17. > :36:19.do think, I genuinely believe, this is a clearer and more comprdhensive

:36:20. > :36:22.piece of legislation, althotgh at this length some members of the

:36:23. > :36:26.House might wonder when one can say that but it will be. I think it is

:36:27. > :36:32.an important piece of legislation which will set out much mord clearly

:36:33. > :36:35.the different powers that are available to the authorities. She

:36:36. > :36:37.raised the issue of this city and proportionality of the stop of

:36:38. > :36:40.course, warrants will still need to be judged on whether they are

:36:41. > :36:48.necessary and proportionate. That will be the criteria that whll

:36:49. > :36:51.continue to apply. In relathon to the issue of liberty versus

:36:52. > :36:55.Security, some people think this is a 0-sum game and that if yot

:36:56. > :36:58.increase one reduce the othdr. I'm very clear that you can't enjoy your

:36:59. > :37:06.liberty until you have your security. The Home Secretarx quite

:37:07. > :37:10.rightly paid tribute to the success of stopping numerous attacks on the

:37:11. > :37:13.public. That is not just down to the profession and skill of those in the

:37:14. > :37:19.security services but to thd rapid decision-making process we currently

:37:20. > :37:23.have involving warrants. Shd and I know acutely that this is a very

:37:24. > :37:26.serious responsibility but H believe strongly these decisions should be

:37:27. > :37:32.made by an elected member of the Scouse, accountable to this House.

:37:33. > :37:38.-- of this House. I'm concerned that involving another decision laker

:37:39. > :37:42.from the judiciary, who may not have particular skills in this area, will

:37:43. > :37:48.bring delay and will bring complication. Many times I was

:37:49. > :37:52.approached at very short notice are difficult times of the day, early in

:37:53. > :37:56.the morning, and made a dechsion, fully aware that I would be hell to

:37:57. > :38:01.scrutiny later post can she explain how this system will work? ,- held

:38:02. > :38:07.to scrutiny. Can she explain how many hours later the decision will

:38:08. > :38:11.be held to scrutiny by the judge? Will there be the ability to discuss

:38:12. > :38:15.the areas of concern and will be intelligence services who prepare

:38:16. > :38:20.the material, which I always found but Tilly is an correct,

:38:21. > :38:23.professionally drafted, havd opportunity, if the Secretary of

:38:24. > :38:28.State has understood the grounds for the judge throwing out a warrant, an

:38:29. > :38:34.opportunity to come back with further applications with ftrther

:38:35. > :38:39.detail? Thank you and I thank my right honourable friend to, as he

:38:40. > :38:42.says, in former role of Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, did see

:38:43. > :38:48.the process of approval warrants. I'm very conscious of the issue of

:38:49. > :38:53.warrants and that they are `ble to be put in place in a reason`ble time

:38:54. > :38:56.frame. There are already, bdtween the Home Office and the sectrity

:38:57. > :39:00.of time in which will take the of time in which will take the

:39:01. > :39:05.Secretary of State to deal with the warrant and the to process the

:39:06. > :39:09.warrant and we would expect to put similar agreements in place with the

:39:10. > :39:13.judicial commissioners, so ht's very clear the time within which any

:39:14. > :39:16.warrant needs to be considered. The judicial commissioners will apply

:39:17. > :39:20.the same principle as will be applied by a court on an application

:39:21. > :39:24.for judicial review when thdy are considering the warrants under the

:39:25. > :39:29.powers that they will be given, but there will be a process by which it

:39:30. > :39:32.will be possible, in an emergency situation, for a Secretary of State

:39:33. > :39:36.authorise a warrant that will then come into place immediately. In

:39:37. > :39:40.normal circumstances, the double lock will be required for the

:39:41. > :39:46.warrant to be exercised but in an emergency, it will be possible for

:39:47. > :39:49.it to be exercised purely on the Secretary of State's authorhsation.

:39:50. > :39:51.The judicial commissioners should then review that decision whthin

:39:52. > :39:55.five days and they will makd a decision as to whether the warrant

:39:56. > :39:59.can continue, whether it should be stopped and if it is stopped whether

:40:00. > :40:01.the material should be kept in certain circumstances or whdther the

:40:02. > :40:10.material that has been gaindd should be destroyed. Today the Homd

:40:11. > :40:16.Secretary has ripped up a phece of legislation that has been unfit for

:40:17. > :40:18.purpose. I particularly welcome the ban on local authorities accessing

:40:19. > :40:24.information about their own citizens. Although I welcomd the

:40:25. > :40:28.additional judicial scrutinx, my concerns are these. Who will train

:40:29. > :40:34.the judges to deal with this very complex area? Because you whll need

:40:35. > :40:38.a panel of judges and a loss of expertise. Will she continud working

:40:39. > :40:42.with the internet providers to ensure that we track people of

:40:43. > :40:45.interest? And I know the Hole Secretary said that the information

:40:46. > :40:51.is equivalent to an itemised bill but there is a lot of inforlation in

:40:52. > :40:54.an itemised bill. If I was to look at her itemised telephone bhll and

:40:55. > :40:56.she was to look at mine, we might be surprised at who we were

:40:57. > :41:03.telephoning. LAUGHTER

:41:04. > :41:08.I think my honourable friend has made the right response to that

:41:09. > :41:15.particular answer in their sedentary suggestion of, "speak for yourself"

:41:16. > :41:18.. There is an issue in relation to the judicial panel. There whll need

:41:19. > :41:22.to be a number of judges who are brought together for this. Ht is not

:41:23. > :41:27.the first time that changes have been made in matters relating to

:41:28. > :41:29.national security, where thd judges are dealing in different

:41:30. > :41:34.circumstances from which thdy have done previously, but judges are used

:41:35. > :41:41.to making independent decishons on judicial review basis and the basis

:41:42. > :41:44.of the law as they know it. A Secretary of State who, likd myself,

:41:45. > :41:47.has been in position for sole time has seen a history of national

:41:48. > :41:50.security operations, for ex`mple, that gives a level of experhence

:41:51. > :41:54.that will not be there the first time a judge looks at this `nd

:41:55. > :41:56.ensuring they are aware of that national security background will be

:41:57. > :42:03.part of the process but I h`ve more faith in the judiciary and their

:42:04. > :42:11.ability to work independently in this than perhaps the right

:42:12. > :42:14.honourable gentleman does. Can I agree with the Home Secretary on the

:42:15. > :42:18.importance of putting faith in the ability of the judiciary? Whll she

:42:19. > :42:21.tell us what consultation she is going to have with the Lord Chief

:42:22. > :42:27.Justice about the selection of members of the panel that whll be

:42:28. > :42:29.appropriate security vetted? Can she ensure, for example, that an

:42:30. > :42:34.appropriate senior judge is available to be on call on ` 24 hour

:42:35. > :42:37.basis, as is perfectly common in other types of judicial revhew

:42:38. > :42:41.proceedings, so the delay is minimised? Will she also give us

:42:42. > :42:43.more detail as to how the appointment of judicial

:42:44. > :42:47.commissioners is to take pl`ce and who will be responsible for that?

:42:48. > :42:51.And will she undertake that the ambition to introduce the bhll by

:42:52. > :42:55.the spring will in no way truncate the pre-legislative scrutinx by the

:42:56. > :42:59.committee? On the last point, we will be talking to the joint

:43:00. > :43:03.scrutiny committee chairman as to the appropriate timetable btt we do

:43:04. > :43:08.intend this to be, although we've got the deadline of December 20 6,

:43:09. > :43:11.we want to make sure this is a proper process by the joint

:43:12. > :43:16.committee and the timetable will reflect that. On a number of issues

:43:17. > :43:20.that he raised in relation to the judicial commissioners and the

:43:21. > :43:22.independent investigatory Powers Commissioner, we have, as mx

:43:23. > :43:26.honourable friend might havd imagined, already been having

:43:27. > :43:31.discussions with the judici`ry in relation to this matter. We would

:43:32. > :43:34.not be putting this into a piece of legislation unless we had spoken to

:43:35. > :43:38.the judiciary about the reqtirements that will be there but therd will be

:43:39. > :43:42.ongoing discussions about the precise elements that he and a

:43:43. > :43:46.number of others have raised in relation to the choice and the

:43:47. > :43:55.numbers of judicial commisshoners who will be required. Both the

:43:56. > :43:58.police and the agencies will agree with what the Home Secretarx and the

:43:59. > :44:02.Shadow Home Secretary have said about the need for both powdrs to

:44:03. > :44:06.deal with serious threats and the safeguards that are needed hn a team

:44:07. > :44:11.Chrissy. So can I welcome agreement to judicial authorisation and her

:44:12. > :44:18.significant statement about transparency, both of which reflect

:44:19. > :44:23.the David Anderson report? But can I particularly ask about the

:44:24. > :44:27.investigatory powers Commissioner. It sounds like something we have

:44:28. > :44:30.called for but will it be accountable to the Executivd and to

:44:31. > :44:35.the Prime Minister, which h`s limited the operation of sole of the

:44:36. > :44:40.existing commissioners, or will it instead be accountable to P`rliament

:44:41. > :44:43.or to the ISC and how will ht interact with the existing

:44:44. > :44:51.counterterror review becausd I do think they've done this and has done

:44:52. > :44:55.an extremely good job in th`t role. On the last point that she raised,

:44:56. > :44:59.there is no intention to ch`nge the role of the independent revhewer of

:45:00. > :45:06.terrorism legislation. We h`ve made some legislation changes to that but

:45:07. > :45:11.there is no intention to ch`nge that role. We are discussing with David

:45:12. > :45:16.Anderson, ensuring that he has extra support for the role that hd is

:45:17. > :45:18.required to do. The appointlent - and I apologise to my honourable

:45:19. > :45:23.friend and others who had r`ised this question - of the investigatory

:45:24. > :45:27.powers commission will be a prime ministerial appointment and the

:45:28. > :45:30.Prime Minister will appoint such members of other judicial

:45:31. > :45:33.commissioners as are considdred necessary and the bill will set out

:45:34. > :45:36.relevant qualifications that the judicial commissioners need to have

:45:37. > :45:42.in order to be able to undertake their role. And, of course, as the

:45:43. > :45:46.right honourable lady will know the existing commissioners do, hn fact,

:45:47. > :45:50.report annually on the work that they undertake. It is a gre`t pity,

:45:51. > :45:53.I think, that that part of our process of oversight has never

:45:54. > :45:56.really been seen by the public, precisely because their reports

:45:57. > :45:59.normally show that the agencies are doing a very good job, and their

:46:00. > :46:05.four doesn't hit the headlines in the way that another sort of report

:46:06. > :46:07.would. We would expect that the independent investigatory powers

:46:08. > :46:12.commission would be insuring that they are making recommendathons

:46:13. > :46:18.potentially, but also making public their views on the processes that

:46:19. > :46:21.they see. More than three dozen members are still seeking to catch

:46:22. > :46:25.my eye and if I'm to have any realistic chance of accommodating

:46:26. > :46:31.them without intruding necessarily on other business, brevity hs now

:46:32. > :46:34.required. Constituent of mine in Cheltenham who work at GCHQ are some

:46:35. > :46:37.of the most talented and dedicated public servants anywhere in this

:46:38. > :46:40.country but they are also conscientious and scrupulous about

:46:41. > :46:44.acting within the law. Does the Secretary of State agree with me

:46:45. > :46:47.that these measures contain a clear authorisation oversight fralework,

:46:48. > :46:51.including a welcome judicial element, which can command public

:46:52. > :46:57.confidence and crucially allow them to do their vital work with

:46:58. > :47:01.professionalism and bright? My honourable friend does well in

:47:02. > :47:06.speaking for his constituency work at GCHQ and, indeed, for all of

:47:07. > :47:11.those who work at GCHQ, and I've met and dealt with a number of them and,

:47:12. > :47:16.indeed, with our other security agencies, Sisi and MI5. I c`n say,

:47:17. > :47:19.absolutely, as he says, thex work with extreme professionalisl in the

:47:20. > :47:23.work that they do and they take extreme care about the powers that

:47:24. > :47:27.they exercise. They are verx conscious of the powers that they

:47:28. > :47:31.hold and they are very careful in the exercise of those powers and I

:47:32. > :47:36.think, as my honourable fridnd says, this bill does provide that

:47:37. > :47:39.important, strong oversight arrangement that will enabld the

:47:40. > :47:48.people at GCHQ and our other agencies to get on with the job that

:47:49. > :47:52.they do so well day in and day out. Whatever is necessary in colbating

:47:53. > :47:55.terrorism and other forms of criminality, can I tell the Home

:47:56. > :47:59.Secretary that I remain concerned, even if I are one of the few who do

:48:00. > :48:02.remain concerned, about the excessive powers which will be given

:48:03. > :48:07.to the security authorities in addition to what they already have,

:48:08. > :48:13.though judicial involvement is better than no judicial involvement.

:48:14. > :48:16.I consider, and I hope the Home Secretary will bear in mind, there

:48:17. > :48:21.is a good deal of concern ottside this House and I certainly consider

:48:22. > :48:27.that if this measure were to be passed along the same lines, without

:48:28. > :48:32.substantial amendments, it would be very unfortunate and a bittdr blow

:48:33. > :48:37.for Civil Liberties. I have to say to the honourable gentleman that he

:48:38. > :48:40.said that he thought there were substantial new powers in this bill.

:48:41. > :48:45.There are not substantial ndw powers in this bill. What this bill does

:48:46. > :48:50.primarily is bring together the powers that are spread across a

:48:51. > :48:54.number of pieces of legislation primarily Ripa but others as well,

:48:55. > :48:58.into one single piece of legislation in a much clearer, more, sensible

:48:59. > :49:04.form that has previously bedn the case. There is a new power, which is

:49:05. > :49:07.the issue of the intranet connection records and the limited accdss to

:49:08. > :49:10.those intimate connection rdcords, but the other powers which `re in

:49:11. > :49:15.this bill are powers which `lready exist. What we have in this bill is

:49:16. > :49:21.strengthened safeguards and a strengthened organisation sxstem.

:49:22. > :49:24.Can I welcome the Home Secrdtary's careful and both will appro`ch to

:49:25. > :49:28.this sensitive area, which hs so important for all our safetx in this

:49:29. > :49:33.country, and in particular the new provisions judicial oversight. If my

:49:34. > :49:36.right honourable friend anthcipates that additional specialist training

:49:37. > :49:40.will be required by members of the judiciary in order to fulfil the

:49:41. > :49:45.wide and dream it she has ottlined today, will it be possible to ensure

:49:46. > :49:56.that there is no delay in pttting that training in place? -- the

:49:57. > :49:59.widened ream it. I thank my right honourable friend and she is

:50:00. > :50:03.absolutely right, and we will be taking every step to ensure that as

:50:04. > :50:07.soon as the legislation is hn place it is possible to put the ndw

:50:08. > :50:11.processes and structures into operation and that will, of course,

:50:12. > :50:14.mean ensuring that those who will be appointed to the investigatory

:50:15. > :50:17.powers commission and the jtdicial commissioners will have the

:50:18. > :50:21.necessary training to ensurd that they can undertake the role we will

:50:22. > :50:25.be giving them. The Secretary of State will be aware that whdn she

:50:26. > :50:28.sought support from this bench in the past for national securhty

:50:29. > :50:35.issues, it has always been willingly given. However, sometimes wd find it

:50:36. > :50:38.hard to take when the government does not tackle serious and

:50:39. > :50:41.organised crime on the ground in Northern Ireland, and the front

:50:42. > :50:44.bench could take measures immediately by way of statutory

:50:45. > :50:49.instruments to address serious and organised fuel crime and thdy should

:50:50. > :50:53.do that urgently. Turning vdry directly to the issue of thd bill,

:50:54. > :50:56.does the Secretary of State recognise that some of the lajor

:50:57. > :51:02.godfathers of that serious `nd organised crime will be in direct

:51:03. > :51:06.communication with some polhtical representatives in Northern

:51:07. > :51:09.Ireland? And there four to `void the department that we had over the

:51:10. > :51:11.National Crime Agency legislation she should avoid a legislathve

:51:12. > :51:30.consent motion for Northern Ireland. I would point out to him th`t we

:51:31. > :51:32.work very hard to ensure thd National Crime Agency was able to

:51:33. > :51:35.work in Northern Ireland, which it is now doing. Therefore I al

:51:36. > :51:40.tackling serious organised crime. As to the issue for legislativd consent

:51:41. > :51:43.motion in Northern Ireland, I am not aware that such a motion with the

:51:44. > :51:45.necessary, but will be speaking with the Northern Ireland Executhve about

:51:46. > :51:55.these matters as indicated darlier. these matters as indicated darlier.

:51:56. > :51:57.I thank my right honourable friend for coming to the House tod`y and

:51:58. > :52:06.giving a comprehensive approach to these issues. She's right to do so

:52:07. > :52:16.because it will affect fund`mentally the civil liberties and rights for

:52:17. > :52:20.those in the country. She whll need to look precisely other words in the

:52:21. > :52:24.Bill, because there has been a certain amount of spin in the papers

:52:25. > :52:33.recently, and we need to look at what is suggested. Regarding

:52:34. > :52:43.warrantry, I am inclined to agree that the jewel key is the rhght way

:52:44. > :52:49.to proceed. -- dual'. But does she agree that the judges should not be

:52:50. > :52:53.those who work to closely whth the police, whose word will not trusted

:52:54. > :53:06.if it is they who are given such a role? I thank him for the work he

:53:07. > :53:10.did regarding warrantry, and it is the case that those who are

:53:11. > :53:16.appointed as judicial commissioners will have to have held high office,

:53:17. > :53:22.so we will be setting a thrdshold high for those appointed to this.

:53:23. > :53:28.This is an important part of the This is an important part of the

:53:29. > :53:31.bill, and those who are appointed must be seen as having the

:53:32. > :53:50.independence necessary to ghve extra confidence in the process. On one

:53:51. > :53:55.particular question, is she happy that the combination of the triple

:53:56. > :54:02.lock is the best way to enstre that the extra safeguarding is provided?

:54:03. > :54:05.Yes, I am, and I apologise because I think some others raised thhs in the

:54:06. > :54:10.questions. It is important to introduce the third element of

:54:11. > :54:12.consultation with the Prime Minister, so that everyone will be

:54:13. > :54:17.clear in this House that anx request to intercept the communicathons of a

:54:18. > :54:24.member of this House, the House of Lords or the other legislattres We

:54:25. > :54:28.will be discussing with the Scottish Government the process in place in

:54:29. > :54:32.relation to those warrants currently signed by Scottish ministers, but I

:54:33. > :54:42.go, and I hope it will give people go, and I hope it will give people

:54:43. > :54:45.confidence in the process. Can I congratulate her for her st`tement,

:54:46. > :54:57.and also the right honourable gentleman for his remarks,

:54:58. > :55:10.particularly around the misnomer of the snoopers charter. Often

:55:11. > :55:19.decisions, such as the Septdmber decisions, such as the Septdmber

:55:20. > :55:42.dossier in 2002, in which the intelligence services reput`tion has

:55:43. > :55:54.yet to fully recover. What does she think has to be done to further

:55:55. > :55:55.improve the public's understanding of the work they do on their

:55:56. > :55:56.behalf, and of course I pay tribute behalf, and of course I pay tribute

:55:57. > :55:57.to the remark she made in hdr statement today around a dotble lock

:55:58. > :55:57.draws on the three reports from draws on the three reports

:55:58. > :55:58.which she refers, which is ` good which she refers, which is ` good

:55:59. > :55:59.more can be done and I would more can be done and I would

:56:00. > :55:59.grateful if she could say what more we can do as the bill passes through

:56:00. > :56:00.the House. He raises an important point of highlighting the mdmbers

:56:01. > :56:00.the public the nature of thd work the public the nature of thd work

:56:01. > :56:01.that the agencies do, and where and that the agencies do, and where and

:56:02. > :56:03.number of steps which have `lready number of steps which have `lready

:56:04. > :56:05.been taken but upon which wd will be building to make sure we have that

:56:06. > :56:07.confidence. I would point to the way in which the agencies have ` more

:56:08. > :56:12.willing to come forward and explain willing to come forward and explain

:56:13. > :56:17.public. I am thinking about the public. I am thinking about the

:56:18. > :56:23.director-general of MI5, dohng a radio interview, the first time this

:56:24. > :56:25.has been done, and anyone rdading the Times and the last couple of

:56:26. > :56:28.weeks will have seen some rdporting weeks will have seen some rdporting

:56:29. > :56:30.in relation to the operations of GCHQ, and this is important because

:56:31. > :56:35.it helps the public underst`nd what the agencies are doing. A l`rge

:56:36. > :56:41.number of constituents have contacted me on this matter. Which

:56:42. > :56:45.he accepted concerns about the proposals go well beyond wh`t are

:56:46. > :56:51.Liberties lobby? It is important Liberties lobby? It is important

:56:52. > :56:54.that members of the House m`ke clear to people exactly what the

:56:55. > :57:03.government is proposing, and the government is proposing, and a

:57:04. > :57:04.strengthened safeguards the government is putting in thhs Bill.

:57:05. > :57:06.I would refer him to the review that David Anderson did, and he cited

:57:07. > :57:14.polling of members of the ptblic which showed that members of the

:57:15. > :57:21.public wanted them to have the powers that keep people safd. We

:57:22. > :57:24.often hear about the right of criminals not to have their privacy

:57:25. > :57:34.intruded upon. Will the Homd Secretary inform the House `bout the

:57:35. > :57:37.perspective of victims of crime She makes an important point and I met

:57:38. > :57:42.with representatives of grotps who support and campaign for victims of

:57:43. > :57:48.crime, victims of child sex abuse, rape and stalking, who were very

:57:49. > :57:52.clear that from their point of view they need to make sure that the

:57:53. > :57:56.police and others have the `bility to use their powers to make sure

:57:57. > :58:10.they can bring perpetrators of these terrible crimes to justice. A few

:58:11. > :58:13.weeks ago the government's PC at public expense seemed to argue that

:58:14. > :58:16.modern technology had rendered the Wilson doctrine impractical and it

:58:17. > :58:24.was not up to much anyway. Know that it has been reborn in the statement,

:58:25. > :58:30.can she tell us what has happened to modern technology over the last few

:58:31. > :58:31.weeks, which now makes practical what was impractical, and how will

:58:32. > :58:41.that extend to whistle-blowdrs who that extend to whistle-blowdrs who

:58:42. > :58:44.may be contacting their MP or MSP? I am not sure I recognise the

:58:45. > :58:51.description he has given, I was clearing the statement I made less

:58:52. > :59:04.than two weeks ago, in relation to the doctrine, that it still exists.

:59:05. > :59:08.I think there has been over time a mythology that has grown up around

:59:09. > :59:11.what the Wilson doctrine actually met because I think members of the

:59:12. > :59:19.House. But it meant no communications would ever bd

:59:20. > :59:23.intercepted, which is not what the doctrine said. If the first duty of

:59:24. > :59:27.the government is the protection of the realm, and the second dtty is

:59:28. > :59:35.that those things are fit for purpose, then they have passed this

:59:36. > :59:41.test with flying colours today. In passing she mentioned the bdnefits

:59:42. > :59:46.her proposals will have in terms of clamping down on paedophiles and

:59:47. > :59:50.father of three young children, I father of three young children, I

:59:51. > :59:59.welcome that, as I'm sure do all the constituents. Can she flesh out a

:00:00. > :00:05.little further what then if it's she sees to those involved in clamping

:00:06. > :00:14.down on this, what this will deliver? I will give him ond example

:00:15. > :00:17.in relation to the Internet connection records power we are

:00:18. > :00:27.introducing. In a recent survey of over 6000 cases, CEOP said the Rover

:00:28. > :00:31.860 people who could not be identified because they did not have

:00:32. > :00:35.this power. With the power they would have been able to identify

:00:36. > :00:44.it. About it, the paedophilds were not able to be identified. Over

:00:45. > :00:47.30,000 individuals were identified in engaging in online child abuse,

:00:48. > :00:52.but only 1000 were actually followed but only 1000 were actually followed

:00:53. > :00:58.up, so I wondered, with the new powers in the draft bill, whll they

:00:59. > :01:00.be matched with resources to ensure prosecutions and safeguarding

:01:01. > :01:06.interventions can take placd as well? As I just indicated, the point

:01:07. > :01:07.is that the increased power is in relation to Internet connection

:01:08. > :01:14.records, giving a greater records, giving a greater

:01:15. > :01:16.responsibility to CEOP and others to identify those who are paedophiles

:01:17. > :01:21.omitting these crimes, and the omitting these crimes, and the

:01:22. > :01:27.National Crime Agency has bden clear that they continue to look `t these

:01:28. > :01:38.issues of people looking at online images and continue to take

:01:39. > :01:46.advantage -- action against them. May I suggest new technologhes will

:01:47. > :01:51.be up dated, such as Facebook messenger, which did not exhst

:01:52. > :02:00.previously. What assurances will she give that we do not need to return

:02:01. > :02:54.to this very soon? This leghslation will last for a good number of years

:02:55. > :03:12.and will take account of thd fact that new technology develops.

:03:13. > :03:14.However one of the concerns raised about the draft Communications data

:03:15. > :03:15.Bill was that it was drawn so wide that there was great concern about

:03:16. > :03:17.what the authorities might have been able to do, so we have had to

:03:18. > :03:20.balance it very carefully. But we are very conscious of the nded to

:03:21. > :03:22.ensure that the bill enables us to move forward as technology develops.

:03:23. > :03:23.Can I welcome the statement today, but it appears that every

:03:24. > :03:24.application will give limitdd revision for investigators

:03:25. > :03:27.accessibility. Every time something is found within an investig`tive

:03:28. > :03:29.process, do they have to go back to the Secretary of State and the judge

:03:30. > :03:29.double lock makes allowances... The double lock makes allowances... The

:03:30. > :03:30.access to communications data will continue to be undertaken in

:03:31. > :03:30.same process currently, which does same process currently, which does

:03:31. > :03:31.not involve warrantry from the Secretary of State. The Homd

:03:32. > :03:31.particularly on the introduction on particularly on the introduction on

:03:32. > :03:32.the judiciary oversight, whhch she the judiciary oversight, whhch she

:03:33. > :03:32.will be aware that many of ts on all sides of the House regard as an

:03:33. > :03:38.essential step forward in m`king sure she can promote at the same

:03:39. > :03:52.Civil liberties of people, which as Civil liberties of people, which as

:03:53. > :03:55.she says are not individual, they go together. In addition to thd double

:03:56. > :03:57.lock, has she considered anx kind of reconciliation methods so that if

:03:58. > :03:59.the judge and Home Secretarx come to different differences that there is

:04:00. > :04:07.a way they can resolve it, a way they can resolve it,

:04:08. > :04:08.the intelligence services come back the intelligence services come back

:04:09. > :04:13.again so that warrants are not lost? He makes an important point. I did

:04:14. > :04:17.not respond to a previous intervention on this, I apologise.

:04:18. > :04:22.In the current system, if the Secretary of State denies a warrant

:04:23. > :04:26.and says he or she does not think it should be put in place, it hs open

:04:27. > :04:31.to the agency concerned to look again, and to come forward with

:04:32. > :04:37.either more information or to abandon the warrant or look at a

:04:38. > :04:41.different warrant they may wish to bring forward, and that process will

:04:42. > :04:59.continue to be possible in the new system. David Anderson calldd for

:05:00. > :05:02.prior judicial authorisation in his report, as she has acknowledged He

:05:03. > :05:04.also said that the new law should comply with human rights st`ndard.

:05:05. > :05:08.Will the Home Secretary confirmed that the bill will comply whth this

:05:09. > :05:14.and the European Convention on Human Rights? As he will be aware it is

:05:15. > :05:18.necessary for ministers to look at that issue with any legislation they

:05:19. > :05:23.bring before the House, which has happened. I have every confhdence

:05:24. > :05:29.that this will comply with human rights requirements. May I welcome

:05:30. > :05:35.the Home Secretary's balancdd the Home Secretary's balancdd

:05:36. > :05:38.approach she has set out today. Is it not important that we continue to

:05:39. > :05:41.reassure the public that thhs is not a proposal for a mass survehllance,

:05:42. > :05:45.and to restate the essential need for this, which is that there is a

:05:46. > :05:50.new form of technology which new form of technology which

:05:51. > :05:51.effectively the law-enforcelent and effectively the law-enforcelent and

:05:52. > :05:58.intelligence agencies are shielded from, simply because the law has not

:05:59. > :06:02.kept up with that technical -- technological development, so it is

:06:03. > :06:06.necessary to update the law with essential safeguards.

:06:07. > :06:12.I think you had hoped the n`il on the head. He has put it perfectly

:06:13. > :06:17.dustup technologically has loved on, the law hasn't. We need to tpdate

:06:18. > :06:23.the law so that our securitx agencies have the powers thdy need

:06:24. > :06:27.to keep us safe. Can we havd an idea of any benchmarks which in form the

:06:28. > :06:32.Home Secretary's declaration to us that these will be world le`ding

:06:33. > :06:37.oversight arrangements? I c`n say to the honourable gentleman th`t I

:06:38. > :06:40.know, as, indeed, I think the honourable member for Edinbtrgh

:06:41. > :06:43.South West indicated, there are other countries that are looking to

:06:44. > :06:48.this legislation precisely because they feel that we are forging a path

:06:49. > :06:51.ahead in relation to this sort of legislation and they will bd looking

:06:52. > :06:53.very closely at what we do `nd perhaps looking to adopt sole

:06:54. > :06:59.elements of this in their own legislation. Could the Home

:07:00. > :07:05.Secretary comment on Lord pollard, the former independent revidw of

:07:06. > :07:08.terrorism, that judges are very good quality women and men but if judges

:07:09. > :07:12.are going to authenticate these issues, they have to learn `bout

:07:13. > :07:15.national is the? Could I also ask the Home Secretary that we've heard

:07:16. > :07:19.about three reports that have influenced the government's thinking

:07:20. > :07:23.on this traffic bill. Could the Home Secretary tell us who else the

:07:24. > :07:25.government has consulted, especially communication companies and internet

:07:26. > :07:32.providers, when drafting thhs legislation? My honourable friend

:07:33. > :07:35.quotes Lord Carlisle, who w`s a previous independent review of

:07:36. > :07:38.terrorism legislation and, of course, it will be necessarx for any

:07:39. > :07:42.judicial commissioners who `re undertaking this warrant trdats to

:07:43. > :07:48.be aware of the context in which they are taking those decishons

:07:49. > :07:51.There has been a large numbdr of meetings with internet servhce

:07:52. > :07:55.providers, both from the UK and overseas. I am the security minister

:07:56. > :08:00.held round tables with US internet service providers. I met soleone I

:08:01. > :08:05.was in the United States in September. We held a round table

:08:06. > :08:08.with UK providers, with civhl liberties groups and with charities

:08:09. > :08:15.representing victims of these are serious crimes. Can I welcole the

:08:16. > :08:23.tone and nature of the statdment? Can I ask the Home Secretarx, what

:08:24. > :08:28.is in particular there in rdlation to the fact that 12 months hs the

:08:29. > :08:32.right amount of time that the police and security agencies will benefit

:08:33. > :08:38.from the data? That is the period of time that is currently in the

:08:39. > :08:43.legislation that we reinforced in the data retention in investigatory

:08:44. > :08:48.powers act in 2014. We lookdd again at this period of time following the

:08:49. > :08:52.digital right island came ott of the European Court of Justice and felt

:08:53. > :08:56.that the balanced an appropriately it had been able to be held for up

:08:57. > :08:59.to 24 month but we felt that it was a balance between not holding data

:09:00. > :09:03.for too long but having it for a sufficient period of time to do the

:09:04. > :09:11.job that the authorities nedd, and that up to 12 months with the right

:09:12. > :09:14.and appropriate time frame. I welcome my right honourable

:09:15. > :09:18.friend's statement and wantdd to ask about the issue of cyber bullying.

:09:19. > :09:24.When we talk about nefarious online activity, this is a very worrying

:09:25. > :09:28.area, particularly given th`t it relates to young, vulnerabld people

:09:29. > :09:31.in many cases and in the most serious cases has led to suhcide.

:09:32. > :09:37.Can I ask her to clarify, in those most serious cases, would these

:09:38. > :09:44.powers be able to be used to but the perpetrators behind bars? Wdll, my

:09:45. > :09:47.honourable friend is right to raise the incidence of cyber bullxing that

:09:48. > :09:53.take place that affect the lives of too many young people and, `s he

:09:54. > :09:57.said, sometimes with tragic consequences. They will be `

:09:58. > :10:00.definition of serious crime. Serious crime is one of the areas in which

:10:01. > :10:06.it is possible for the agencies to apply for interception warr`nt -

:10:07. > :10:09.warrantry and I would expect that the most serious and that that would

:10:10. > :10:17.come into that definition btt I will check that point and write to him,

:10:18. > :10:23.if I may. Thank you, Mr Spe`ker The bill that has been presented, does

:10:24. > :10:28.it deal with the issue about when somebody is actually applying to go

:10:29. > :10:31.through the browsing, the dhrectory, as the Home Secretary refers to Can

:10:32. > :10:36.we be assured that if there is no procedures at the moment in the

:10:37. > :10:41.bill, could they think about having a system where, for example,

:10:42. > :10:44.somebody at the rank of chidf superintendent is that inithal

:10:45. > :10:50.permission to be able to go through the browsing history and thdn

:10:51. > :10:55.secondly to look of the criteria for that initial browsing to be done? I

:10:56. > :10:59.say to the honourable lady that law enforcement will not be abld to have

:11:00. > :11:04.access to browsing history. They will just be able to have access to

:11:05. > :11:08.the first device or social ledia site that the individual device

:11:09. > :11:14.accessed for the limited purposes that I've set out, for IP

:11:15. > :11:16.resolution, for whether somdbody is looking at an illegal website or

:11:17. > :11:20.looking at communication services that they have accessed. Thd

:11:21. > :11:24.arrangements for the authorhsation of that are the arrangements that

:11:25. > :11:27.have existed for communicathons data in relation to telephony. These were

:11:28. > :11:32.looked at by the joint scrutiny committee who said that thex were

:11:33. > :11:37.the right process and that they were indeed a process which led to

:11:38. > :11:41.serious and proper consider`tion of this access, albeit that it is not

:11:42. > :11:44.the browsing history, and that that was the right measures that were

:11:45. > :11:48.already being taken in that authorisation process. I don't wish

:11:49. > :11:52.to embarrass any individual honourable member but can I just

:11:53. > :11:55.gently point out that a member who was not here at the start of the

:11:56. > :11:59.statement, or who has gone hn and out of the chamber during the course

:12:00. > :12:03.of it, should not be standing and expecting to be called? We have a

:12:04. > :12:07.very long established practhce that a member must be present at the

:12:08. > :12:10.start of the statement and remain present at the start of the

:12:11. > :12:15.exchanges and I think, on the whole, the House will think that that is a

:12:16. > :12:18.very proper courtesy. I welcome this statement which will help m`ke the

:12:19. > :12:21.country safer, prevent local authorities from accessing

:12:22. > :12:26.communications data. The Hole Secretary rightly condemned the

:12:27. > :12:29.extraordinaire claim by the shadow home secretary in an otherwhse

:12:30. > :12:32.positive response that the Prime Minister had said that the dntire

:12:33. > :12:35.Muslim population condoned extremism. Would she confirled to

:12:36. > :12:39.the House today that in his speech on the 7th of October, he

:12:40. > :12:42.specifically recognised the value of religious teaching across all

:12:43. > :12:45.religions but that the teaching of intolerance or separatism w`s not

:12:46. > :12:49.acceptable? Would she also `gree with me that many of us no good

:12:50. > :12:53.examples of examining teachhng in our insurgency is and that the

:12:54. > :12:58.message is very clear. -- Islamic teaching. We should unite against

:12:59. > :13:00.extremism using all modern tools appropriately and if you have

:13:01. > :13:05.nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear? He is absolutely right that

:13:06. > :13:10.the Prime Minister, in the speech in which he referred to, did wdlcome

:13:11. > :13:14.and recognise the important role that faith teaching plays in our

:13:15. > :13:19.side take on what we all wish to see an end to is intolerance, sdparatism

:13:20. > :13:23.and division and those who would seek to divide our communithes, and

:13:24. > :13:31.that is what our counter extremism bill is so important for. As the

:13:32. > :13:34.home affairs spokesman for our party, can I commend the Secretary

:13:35. > :13:36.of State for the reassurancds you have given in your statement this

:13:37. > :13:41.afternoon and your statements over the course of the weekend about

:13:42. > :13:46.crucially what is in this bhll but, that's more importantly still, what

:13:47. > :13:50.is not contained within this bill. We are grateful for those

:13:51. > :13:54.indications. There was an exchange earlier, Mr Speaker, about the

:13:55. > :13:57.composition of the joint legislative scrutiny committee. Can I encourage

:13:58. > :14:04.the Home Secretary to consider making sure that it is composed to

:14:05. > :14:07.reflect this House but, mord importantly, the regions of this

:14:08. > :14:11.United Kingdom, and that Northern Ireland's voice can be presdnt in

:14:12. > :14:16.most discussions to make sure that the legislation we are proposing

:14:17. > :14:21.today is in full cognizance of the effects and impacts in Northern

:14:22. > :14:25.Ireland? As the honourable gentleman may recognise, the decisions about

:14:26. > :14:29.the composition of committeds is a matter which is taken up by the

:14:30. > :14:34.business managers in the Hotse. But I can assure him that it is my

:14:35. > :14:38.intention, as I indicated to David Ford one I spoke to him yesterday,

:14:39. > :14:41.that we continue to work with Northern Ireland officials `nd that

:14:42. > :14:46.ministers will be available to speak to ministers in Northern Irdland

:14:47. > :14:49.about these matters to assure that we do take into account the

:14:50. > :14:54.considerations in relation to Northern Ireland, as this bhll goes

:14:55. > :15:01.through, it's scrutiny and `s it goes through the House. I wdlcome

:15:02. > :15:03.the Secretary of State's colments that local authorities will be

:15:04. > :15:07.banned from accessing the state of us could I ask for a bit more

:15:08. > :15:16.information about whether or not the life of a warrant is extenddd for

:15:17. > :15:26.any the Thierry -- any period of time, or... Any agency that wishes

:15:27. > :15:33.to intercept would need a w`rrant to do so. The current position, which

:15:34. > :15:36.it is intended to replicate, is that a warrant has applied for bx the

:15:37. > :15:39.security and intelligence agencies and is normally is in place for six

:15:40. > :15:43.months under warrant that is applied for by law enforcement is in place

:15:44. > :15:46.for three months. There is ` much shorter period of time when an

:15:47. > :15:54.emergency warrant is signed. It normally must be be considered

:15:55. > :15:58.within five days. I, too, wdlcome the Home Secretary's statemdnt

:15:59. > :16:01.today. Can I ask my right honourable friend if she agrees that it is

:16:02. > :16:07.important that the public fdel reassured by these proposals and,

:16:08. > :16:10.therefore, while it is clear that the police and the security services

:16:11. > :16:14.need the very important powdrs set out today, where they are most

:16:15. > :16:16.intrusive it is right that they are authorised by secretaries of state

:16:17. > :16:23.who are, after all, account`ble to the public? I absolutely agree. This

:16:24. > :16:25.is why I think the double lock is important. Many people have called

:16:26. > :16:29.for the independence of the judiciary to be involved in this

:16:30. > :16:31.process but I think it is ilportant not to abandon the public

:16:32. > :16:36.accountability of secretarids of State. It is the Secretary of State

:16:37. > :16:38.who can stand on this House and is accountable for the actions of the

:16:39. > :16:43.agencies and that's why it's important that they continud to

:16:44. > :16:47.sign. I thank the Home Secrdtary for her statement of a house. She will

:16:48. > :16:50.know that the debate around the use of investigatory powers oftdn

:16:51. > :16:53.focuses around prevention of terrorism. Would you also agree with

:16:54. > :16:58.me that the powers that are proposed are also important for keephng the

:16:59. > :17:05.public safe from cyber crimhnal is and organised crime? Yes and he is

:17:06. > :17:08.right to mention financial cyber crime. This is one of the ndw forms

:17:09. > :17:12.of crime. As crime becomes online it is important that our enforcement

:17:13. > :17:18.agencies have the online powers to deal with it. I welcome my right

:17:19. > :17:22.honourable friend's statement and would she agree that the dotble lock

:17:23. > :17:24.proposed means that we have a judicial oversight to ensurd it is

:17:25. > :17:29.legal and proportionate and the Secretary of State will enstre that

:17:30. > :17:33.the public interest is satisfied by the warrant being issued? Yds, I do,

:17:34. > :17:37.and that's why I think it is important that we retain th`t double

:17:38. > :17:41.lock in relation to these m`tters, so I think it will give the public

:17:42. > :17:45.extra confidence in the process that is undertaken to ensure that these

:17:46. > :17:52.very intrusive powers by thd authorities are only used when

:17:53. > :17:55.necessary and proportionate. Can I welcome my right honourable

:17:56. > :17:58.friend's statement today and, again, it shows why she is held in such

:17:59. > :18:02.high regard by those who opdrate in these teams. Would she agred with me

:18:03. > :18:06.that one of our great privileges in this country is the relativd safety

:18:07. > :18:09.and security we enjoy in a desperately unstable world `nd that

:18:10. > :18:14.sometimes these privileges require a price which, in my experience, the

:18:15. > :18:18.vast majority in this country are willing to pay, so long as they are

:18:19. > :18:21.safe? I think my honourable friend has made a very important point and

:18:22. > :18:27.may I say, he is somebody who has himself put himself on the line to

:18:28. > :18:32.maintain our security and ddfence this country. He is right. For most

:18:33. > :18:35.members of the public, they want to know that the authorities h`ve the

:18:36. > :18:38.powers they need to keep thdm safe but they want to ensure that those

:18:39. > :18:46.powers are exercised properly and that's where the safeguards we put

:18:47. > :18:50.in this bill will be so important. I, too, welcome this statemdnt and I

:18:51. > :18:58.have been alarmed, also, about the term in office who -- so-called

:18:59. > :18:59.snoopers' charter. I have h`d correspondence from concerndd

:19:00. > :19:02.constituents but as a forward-looking government, doing

:19:03. > :19:06.nothing is not an option and we should listen to those police chase

:19:07. > :19:10.and give them those essenti`l tools. Does the Home Secretary agrde? I

:19:11. > :19:13.think it is important. The police have been very clear that they need

:19:14. > :19:17.these tools to be able to do the job that we want them to do in relation

:19:18. > :19:21.to serious and organised crhminals and particularly in relation to

:19:22. > :19:24.paedophiles as well. On the first point that she made, that's why I

:19:25. > :19:28.particularly welcome the colment made by the right honourabld member

:19:29. > :19:34.that across this House we c`n send a message out today that this is not

:19:35. > :19:38.about mass surveillance. I congratulate the Home Secretary and

:19:39. > :19:43.her team on introducing much-needed transparency and coherence hnto what

:19:44. > :19:47.has been an incomprehensibld regime, informed deeply by three

:19:48. > :19:52.independent report and, importantly, enabling our intelligence, security

:19:53. > :19:56.and law enforcement agencies to have the powers that they need to deal

:19:57. > :20:01.with this unprecedented scale and character of the threat this country

:20:02. > :20:05.faces. On warranting, would she agree with me that the judiciary are

:20:06. > :20:10.well placed to deal with thdir new involvement? As a barrister, I made

:20:11. > :20:12.urgent applications on the phone later night on an emergency basis to

:20:13. > :20:16.senior judges, and so they `re senior judges, and so they `re

:20:17. > :20:21.experienced in this. Can my right honourable friend just confhrm that

:20:22. > :20:27.this double lock strikes thd right balance of public accountabhlity and

:20:28. > :20:30.appropriate checks and balances I thank her particularly for her

:20:31. > :20:34.reference to her own experidnce I think sometimes people have a vision

:20:35. > :20:37.that judges will take a verx long time to do all of this. As she has

:20:38. > :20:42.said, there are many occasions currently where judges have to react

:20:43. > :20:45.very quickly to requests th`t come through and have to be available in

:20:46. > :20:50.order to do that, and I expdct they will do so in these particular

:20:51. > :20:53.circumstances, too, and this does strike the right balance between the

:20:54. > :20:55.public accountability and independence of the judiciary that

:20:56. > :21:02.will give the public that extra confidence.

:21:03. > :21:12.I am very grateful for the dxercise. The house has generally welcomed the

:21:13. > :21:16.approach of the Home Secret`ry, as do I. Can I should be more

:21:17. > :21:24.aggressive in one regard. In a statement she bid to equipmdnt

:21:25. > :21:28.interference powers. Can shd frame those powers so they could be used

:21:29. > :21:34.to disrupt or destroy servers distributing child abuse im`ges or

:21:35. > :21:37.other criminal material? My honourable friend raises an

:21:38. > :21:41.interesting point. We do evdrything we can to make sure we are taking

:21:42. > :21:45.action against those distributing child abuse material and a lot of

:21:46. > :21:52.what is being done with the industry in relation to remove the m`terial

:21:53. > :21:58.and protecting children onlhne. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I th`nk the

:21:59. > :22:02.Home Secretary for her statdment. Lord Carlile has said there has been

:22:03. > :22:07.a lot of the monetisation of the police and security services over

:22:08. > :22:12.the retention for such information and he said it is absurd to suggest

:22:13. > :22:16.the police and security services have a casual desire to intrude on

:22:17. > :22:22.the privacy of innocent. Dods my right honourable friend share that

:22:23. > :22:27.view? Absolutely and it is `lso the case that the heads of agencies had

:22:28. > :22:31.made clear they have no deshre an interdict on everybody's lives. This

:22:32. > :22:37.is why the message that is not about mass surveillance is import`nt. This

:22:38. > :22:48.is about targeting those who seek to do us harm and any action t`ken as

:22:49. > :22:53.always necessary and proportionate. You may recall last Thursdax there

:22:54. > :22:56.was considerable disquiet across the house about the seven-year delay in

:22:57. > :22:59.the publication of the Chilcott enquiry and the fact that the

:23:00. > :23:05.Government chose not to makd a statement about it. You invhted the

:23:06. > :23:08.Government front bench to consider its position and I now understand

:23:09. > :23:13.that the Prime Minister has declined to make a statement. Devon there are

:23:14. > :23:18.matters which are clearly in the Government was my responsibhlity,

:23:19. > :23:22.for example declaimed the C`binet Secretary delayed the release of

:23:23. > :23:26.documents, the National Sectrity timetable built into the release of

:23:27. > :23:30.Chilcott and how we can avohd such a disgraceful situation occurring

:23:31. > :23:35.again with a seven-year del`y in such an enquiry, can you confirm it

:23:36. > :23:40.would have been in order for the Government to make such a statement

:23:41. > :23:44.without prejudicing the inddpendence of the enquiry and thereford the

:23:45. > :23:50.decision not to do so and the fence which I believe to be considerable

:23:51. > :23:55.for the 179 service families waiting for answers from the enquirx. That

:23:56. > :23:59.decision is one for the Prile Minister and the prime minister

:24:00. > :24:04.alone. And grateful to the rate honourable gentleman for his point

:24:05. > :24:07.of order. I am happy to confirm it would have been entirely orderly for

:24:08. > :24:15.a statement by a Government minister to be made on this matter. The right

:24:16. > :24:18.honourable gentleman MH17 is experienced and he knows th`t as an

:24:19. > :24:23.entitlement of a minister btt it is not an obligation the checkout and

:24:24. > :24:28.pose on a minister. In the `bsence of the offer of a Government

:24:29. > :24:35.statement, the right honour`ble gentleman will also be well aware

:24:36. > :24:38.there is a range of options open to honourable and right honour`ble

:24:39. > :24:40.members who seek to elicit from the Government a statement of its

:24:41. > :24:45.current thinking on the matter in question. The right honourable

:24:46. > :24:58.gentleman doesn't need me to provide him with the toolkit, but I am happy

:24:59. > :25:04.to confirm its existence. Thank you, Mr Speaker. 27 hours ago the

:25:05. > :25:09.single largest job loss announcement was made in Northern Ireland with

:25:10. > :25:13.the loss of 860 directly employed in a Michelin in my constituency. There

:25:14. > :25:18.hasn't been as much a squeak from the front bench, not a statdment,

:25:19. > :25:25.press release and quite frankly nothing. It bothers me that a

:25:26. > :25:29.convention appears to be arhsing in this house that Northern Irdland has

:25:30. > :25:35.become once again plays a p`rt where ministers think because there is a

:25:36. > :25:38.devolved institution they h`ve no responsibility to get to th`t

:25:39. > :25:44.dispatch box and issue statdments about important matters that affect

:25:45. > :25:50.860 people in Northern Irel`nd. Could the Minister, Goody Speaker

:25:51. > :25:53.assure is no such convention will be allowed to the rise under hhs

:25:54. > :25:59.stewardship and that ministdrs will be urged to be at that disp`tch box

:26:00. > :26:06.tomorrow? I am sensitive to the important point that the honourable

:26:07. > :26:09.gentleman has made. I hope no such convention has arisen. Suffhce to

:26:10. > :26:12.say without going into mattdrs that shouldn't be raised on the floor of

:26:13. > :26:18.the house, there is sometimds competition for time and yotr house,

:26:19. > :26:22.point to which I know the honourable gentleman will be sensitive, not

:26:23. > :26:26.least in relation to today when we have a very important statelent by

:26:27. > :26:30.the Home Secretary which I rightly anticipated would be heavilx

:26:31. > :26:34.subscribed. However there are other days and other opportunities of a

:26:35. > :26:41.variety of kinds, and I hopd the honourable gentleman will sdek to

:26:42. > :26:46.take those opportunities. I can assure him eyeball to eyeball and in

:26:47. > :26:50.front of all present members, the chair will be no obstacle to the

:26:51. > :27:03.pursuit by him and others of such opportunities. Yesterday yot rule

:27:04. > :27:11.you were seeking consultation on the decision about the Prime Minister to

:27:12. > :27:14.take off three long serving and a very active and effective

:27:15. > :27:19.conservative members of the Council of Europe and they have now been

:27:20. > :27:23.removed against their will from the delegation. You said you wotld

:27:24. > :27:30.consult on this because the suggestion is this house should

:27:31. > :27:33.consider the delegation. I was surprised to see one of the

:27:34. > :27:38.nominations on the delegation is a member of the other house who has

:27:39. > :27:42.twice before the Standards Committee and was asked to make an apology to

:27:43. > :27:48.the house because of links he had with lobbyists. I would likd to

:27:49. > :27:53.suggest that many of us would like to question the membership of the

:27:54. > :27:59.delegation and on that basis it might pay for the reason whx this

:28:00. > :28:02.shouldn't just be Prime prile ministerial decision becausd these

:28:03. > :28:07.people are representing Britain and Europe and we should bring ht to the

:28:08. > :28:12.house and MPs can debate and vote on it. I did indeed say yesterday in

:28:13. > :28:17.response to a point of order on this matter but I would reflect tpon it.

:28:18. > :28:23.I have reflected upon its and continue to do so. I did sax to the

:28:24. > :28:29.house but I thought it was ly responsibility to be assured of the

:28:30. > :28:35.proprietary of the process, but it was not for the chair to assess the

:28:36. > :28:42.merits of the merits of indhvidual prospective candidates for

:28:43. > :28:46.membership. There may well be an opportunity for this matter to be

:28:47. > :28:52.considered by the house rel`tively shortly. I don't know if th`t will

:28:53. > :28:55.be the case but it could be. In the meantime, I am happy to inform the

:28:56. > :29:02.honourable gentleman but I have not sent a list of new proposed members

:29:03. > :29:06.of the delegation and pending possible consideration of the matter

:29:07. > :29:11.by the house, it seems pruddnt for me at this stage not to do so. I

:29:12. > :29:20.hope that this helpful to the honourable gentleman and thd house.

:29:21. > :29:23.Last week I tabled a very ddtailed and specific question relathng to

:29:24. > :29:31.the proposed extension of the limits of restoration of supply and nuclear

:29:32. > :29:35.submarines on the Clyde. From 2 minutes to a maximum of thrde

:29:36. > :29:40.others. As a constituency MP I have been approached by constitudnts to

:29:41. > :29:44.raise this matter on their behalf, however rather than answering my

:29:45. > :29:46.question the Ministry of Defence simply European Union Agencx for

:29:47. > :29:51.Fundamental Rights eight spdcific questions and give me one answer and

:29:52. > :29:55.which I believe the head behind national security. My questhons were

:29:56. > :30:01.specifically on health and safety. I am of the belief that nucle`r safety

:30:02. > :30:05.at Faslane is not just a matter for Babcock or the Ministry of Defence

:30:06. > :30:08.but is a matter of serious concern for my constituents and thehr

:30:09. > :30:13.concerns cannot be dismissed like this. I would be greatly advised if

:30:14. > :30:19.you could advise me what, if any, because I have. I would say to the

:30:20. > :30:23.honourable gentleman first of all I feel his pain. He has tabled a

:30:24. > :30:28.series of serious questions and is best satisfied by what he rdgards as

:30:29. > :30:33.a group and minimalist response I remember as a backbencher once

:30:34. > :30:36.tabling several dozen questhons to a particular department and bd more

:30:37. > :30:44.than a little aggrieved to receive a group and extremely minimalhst

:30:45. > :30:47.response. I am genuinely gr`teful to the honourable gentleman for giving

:30:48. > :30:50.me noticed yesterday of the honourable gentleman for giving me

:30:51. > :30:53.noticed yesterday of this p`rt of order and no doubt those concerns

:30:54. > :30:59.have been heard on the Treasury bench. I hope they will rel`y them

:31:00. > :31:03.to the Ministry of Defence. The content of answers the questions is

:31:04. > :31:08.a matter for ministers rathdr than a chair. It is quite frequently the

:31:09. > :31:13.case, on the governments of different colours, that members do

:31:14. > :31:17.not find the answer is entirely satisfactory. While it is rdasonable

:31:18. > :31:22.the Government is unwilling to put information into the public domain

:31:23. > :31:26.which would damage national security or the effectiveness of the Armed

:31:27. > :31:29.Forces, there is long been debate about whether the balance bdtween

:31:30. > :31:35.security and transparency is appropriately struck. The honourable

:31:36. > :31:40.member asked what recourse he can seek. If he wishes he may rdfer the

:31:41. > :31:44.matter to the Procedure Comlittee under the chairmanship of the

:31:45. > :31:49.honourable gentleman, as th`t committee monitors the answdring of

:31:50. > :31:53.questions on behalf of the house. Alternatively, he may use hhs

:31:54. > :32:00.ingenuity to pursue the matter through other avenues. The table

:32:01. > :32:05.office is always ready to advise honourable members on the options

:32:06. > :32:10.open to them. I feel sure the honourable gentleman will bd making

:32:11. > :32:15.the short journey to the Table Office. If they are no further point

:32:16. > :32:27.of order, I come now to the presentation of a bill. Marriage and

:32:28. > :32:40.civil partnership registrathon. Second reading. Friday the 4th of

:32:41. > :32:42.December. We come now to thd ten minute rule motion which thd right

:32:43. > :32:52.honourable gentleman has bedn waiting for. I beg move leaves be

:32:53. > :32:56.given to bring any bill to consolidate and amend provisions

:32:57. > :33:00.about the House of Commons lembers' fund and provisions about the House

:33:01. > :33:06.of Commons resource estimatds. This is not a Government Bill, not a

:33:07. > :33:09.Government hand-out belt, it is a minor House of Commons management

:33:10. > :33:14.bill. The bill is not new, there have been at least two similar bills

:33:15. > :33:20.in the last parliament which fell due to lack of time. I suspdct few

:33:21. > :33:23.members will be aware that `part from a 0 of the small monthly

:33:24. > :33:28.deduction to be seen on thehr monthly payslip. The fund w`s

:33:29. > :33:33.established before the Second World War when there was not parlhamentary

:33:34. > :33:36.pension to help former membdrs who have fallen into financial

:33:37. > :33:42.difficulties. It has also bden used to dock pensions of Windows who left

:33:43. > :33:47.the house went with as even more entitlement and for a few isolated

:33:48. > :33:51.cases of hardship for former members. As the house will

:33:52. > :33:57.recognise, as time passes, the demand has dropped, payment at the

:33:58. > :34:02.moment has worked out the l`st financial year at ?137,000. The fund

:34:03. > :34:10.has grown to a considerable ?7 million. At present, the fund is

:34:11. > :34:18.drawn from compulsory contrhbutions from members, from investments and

:34:19. > :34:22.an annual contribution from the Treasury of ?215,000, compared to

:34:23. > :34:27.members contributions of ?14,00 per year. The bill will remove the

:34:28. > :34:31.requirement of existing prilary legislation that members make

:34:32. > :34:37.monthly contributions of ?2. In effect, the trustees will bd able to

:34:38. > :34:42.cease deducting contributions. They intend to do so immediately, since

:34:43. > :34:47.the fund is, to put it simply, considerable subplots. The bill will

:34:48. > :34:52.be set in such a way to enable the trustees to recommend resumption of

:34:53. > :34:56.the contributions if needed up to a maximum of 0.2% of pay. The trustees

:34:57. > :35:01.can, if they agree, return `ny surplus funds to the Treasury. The

:35:02. > :35:06.trustees have requested this particular description. It will

:35:07. > :35:09.extend the class of beneficharies to assist all dependents of former

:35:10. > :35:14.members who experience severe hardship. It will also remove the

:35:15. > :35:19.requirement for trustees to be current MPs. I'm sure the house will

:35:20. > :35:23.agree it would seem sensibld, for example, for the trustees to ask the

:35:24. > :35:28.Association of former members nominate one trustee and in addition

:35:29. > :35:31.to enable the trustees to gdt over the problem when following ` general

:35:32. > :35:36.election a number of members who are trustees may lose their seats. The

:35:37. > :35:40.bill will allow such former MPs to remain as trustees temporarhly until

:35:41. > :35:47.they are formally replaced. For efficiency reasons, it will make

:35:48. > :35:51.various Acts governing the fund to create a comprehensive centre for

:35:52. > :35:56.governing legislation. It whll remove unnecessary or outdated

:35:57. > :35:58.costs, procedures and restrhctions and provide a streamlined sdrvers

:35:59. > :36:00.were to create a comprehenshve centre for governing legisl`tion. It

:36:01. > :36:06.will remove unnecessary or outdated costs, procedures and restrhctions

:36:07. > :36:11.and provide a streamlined sdrvice set out in the administration 's act

:36:12. > :36:16.1978. This will enable the house to merge the administration and members

:36:17. > :36:21.estimates into one at some future date, if it were deemed deshrable to

:36:22. > :36:25.do so. That decision would be taken with the Commons commission, subject

:36:26. > :36:30.to discussion with the Treasury There is cross-party support, plus

:36:31. > :36:37.the support, for the small tiding up bill.

:36:38. > :36:44.The question is that the honourable member has leave to bring in the

:36:45. > :36:56.bill, as many as art of that opinion say aye, the eyes have it. ,- ayes.

:36:57. > :37:33.Who will prepare and bring hn the bill? In a Paul Beresford.

:37:34. > :37:43.House of Commons Administration Bill. Second reading what d`y?

:37:44. > :37:54.Friday the 4th of December. Friday the 4th of December. We now come...

:37:55. > :38:05.I am purposely speaking rather slowly, we now come to the

:38:06. > :38:11.opposition day motion in thd name of the leader... I can't go much more

:38:12. > :38:20.slowly than this! Point of order, Madam! A point of order! Madame

:38:21. > :38:23.Debbie de Speaker, obviouslx the house is in anticipation of an

:38:24. > :38:31.important debate, what procddures are in place if someone, a linister

:38:32. > :38:38.or shadow minister does not turn up?! The honourable gentlem`n makes

:38:39. > :38:46.an excellent and most immedhate point, but I have to say, and I am

:38:47. > :38:51.saying this very slowly, I `m very pleased to be able to answer the

:38:52. > :38:58.honourable gentleman that whereas I was looking for a solution, the

:38:59. > :39:04.person, a certain member appearing through the door, I no longdr have

:39:05. > :39:10.to consider that solution. We now come to the opposition day lotion in

:39:11. > :39:14.the name of the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Andy Burnham to

:39:15. > :39:20.move. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I beg to move the

:39:21. > :39:23.motion standing in my name `nd those of my honourable and right

:39:24. > :39:27.honourable friends. I should thank my honourable friend who is about to

:39:28. > :39:31.leave the chamber, old alli`nces forged over the cause of water

:39:32. > :39:36.fluoridation stand you in good stead, so I am grateful to him for

:39:37. > :39:41.that. Madam Deputy Speaker, we have just been discussing the powers the

:39:42. > :39:45.keep a safe in the 21st century I keep a safe in the 21st century I

:39:46. > :39:49.would be first to argue that this house has a duty to provide those

:39:50. > :39:55.powers alongside strong safdguards, but of course it is only half the

:39:56. > :39:59.story. Alongside the powers, we need the people, to put them into

:40:00. > :40:04.practice, and this was the bit that was missing from the Home

:40:05. > :40:07.Secretary's statement. In the 1 th and 20th centuries, Britain led the

:40:08. > :40:12.world in policing, that is because our policing by consent moddl was

:40:13. > :40:18.based on an investment in good people with a strong sense of public

:40:19. > :40:24.location. Any 21st century, crime is changing. It is moving online and

:40:25. > :40:28.becoming more complex. -- in the 21st century. But what will never

:40:29. > :40:39.change is the simple principle that the foundation stone is the building

:40:40. > :40:44.of relationships at a local level. It feels right to paid revidw two

:40:45. > :40:48.police officers and civilian staff. What unites this house is a deep

:40:49. > :40:52.sense of gratitude to the mdn and women who work everyday to keep our

:40:53. > :40:59.constituents safe and put themselves in harms to do it. I give w`y. Would

:41:00. > :41:02.he agree with me that amongst the police that the public are lost

:41:03. > :41:06.supportive of the safer neighbourhood teams? It is that

:41:07. > :41:11.which has been so severely undermined by spending cuts of the

:41:12. > :41:16.last few years. We have seen a 0% fall in police between 2011 and this

:41:17. > :41:21.spring in Westminster, and lany constituents are saying to le that

:41:22. > :41:24.they no longer see any eviddnce of safer neighbourhood team is on the

:41:25. > :41:30.beat, and that is a court of great sadness. -- a cause. My honourable

:41:31. > :41:36.friend anticipates me, becatse that will be the heart of what I have to

:41:37. > :41:40.say, and I'm sure, like me, she feels a great pride in what the last

:41:41. > :41:44.Labour government did to invest in neighbourhood community polhcing,

:41:45. > :41:53.and those changes have been noticed by the public and build confidence

:41:54. > :41:58.at local level in policing, and that is now at risk. I will give way to

:41:59. > :42:02.my honourable friend before making some further progress. Can H thank

:42:03. > :42:08.my right honourable friend for giving way? Can I make a pohnt I

:42:09. > :42:15.made last week, that in Enfheld we have seen, since 2010, a loss of 152

:42:16. > :42:21.uniformed officers off our streets? In the last year alone, a 22%

:42:22. > :42:25.increase in violent crime in all categories. I think there is a

:42:26. > :42:29.connection between these two things, I wonder what my right

:42:30. > :42:34.honourable friend thinks, bdcause the apply from the Leader of the

:42:35. > :42:38.House was less than satisfactory. Unusual! My honourable friend is

:42:39. > :42:43.absolutely right. There is dvidence that violent crime, knife crime

:42:44. > :42:51.sexual assault, is on the increase. And she is also right to sax that

:42:52. > :42:55.the Met has seen some reductions, particularly in her community. The

:42:56. > :42:59.big worry is, if the governlent proceeds with the spending plans

:43:00. > :43:03.that they have set out in the Budget, we could see thousands of

:43:04. > :43:06.police officers taken off the streets of this country, but

:43:07. > :43:10.particularly in London, where the change will be most keenly felt and

:43:11. > :43:13.that is something that should give concern to members on all shdes of

:43:14. > :43:18.the house. I will make a little more progress than give way later. Last

:43:19. > :43:22.week, the shadow police Minhster and I joined the Home Secretary and the

:43:23. > :43:26.police Minister at the police bravery awards. It was a hulbling

:43:27. > :43:31.evening, I am sure we would all agree, particularly poignant with PC

:43:32. > :43:37.David Phillips in the minds of many. We think of his familx today,

:43:38. > :43:40.and we hope they take some comfort from the huge public response and

:43:41. > :43:45.outpouring of feeling that we have seen. As I said when I started this

:43:46. > :43:51.job, when the Home Secretarx gets it right, she will have my support and

:43:52. > :43:57.I have just offered that to work on the Investigatory Powers Bill. But

:43:58. > :44:03.where she and the Government get it wrong, then, Madam Deputy Speaker, I

:44:04. > :44:08.am not going to hold back from saying so, particularly where public

:44:09. > :44:12.and community safety is at risk and that brings me to my central point.

:44:13. > :44:16.I believe this government is about to cause serious damage to our

:44:17. > :44:20.police service, and I also believe that if they don't change course,

:44:21. > :44:25.they are about to put public safety at risk. I will give way to my

:44:26. > :44:33.honourable friend. Would my honourable friend agree that the

:44:34. > :44:40.problem with the Government policy is that Conservative police and

:44:41. > :44:45.crime commission is preparing a judicial review, because in addition

:44:46. > :44:55.to a 43% cut achieved and proposed, they are proposing another ?184

:44:56. > :44:58.million with Al-Quds as -- `s a result of the resource in changes?

:44:59. > :45:02.We are not considering just the overall size of the cake for the

:45:03. > :45:05.police, how much money the police budget gets from the spending

:45:06. > :45:10.review, but also how that c`ke is then divvied up, and what wd have

:45:11. > :45:15.seen this week is police and crime Commissioners of all political

:45:16. > :45:19.colours coming together to say that the rushed changes to the police

:45:20. > :45:26.funding formula could cause serious destabilisation of our police

:45:27. > :45:30.services, and I would be interested to know what response the Government

:45:31. > :45:36.will make to the letter thex have received. I spoke to my polhce and

:45:37. > :45:42.crime commission at yesterd`y, and he confirmed to me, and I qtote we

:45:43. > :45:45.are in a strong position to face future challenges while maintaining

:45:46. > :45:50.frontline services. Does he agree with me that many factors influence

:45:51. > :45:56.performance, of which finance is just one? That may well be the case,

:45:57. > :46:00.Madam Deputy Speaker, I don't know, I have not seen the details, but

:46:01. > :46:04.could I point out that it is not the case everywhere? I would prdfer her

:46:05. > :46:09.to the comments made by the chief constable of Lancashire yesterday

:46:10. > :46:13.before the Home Affairs Seldct Committee, when he said, gohng

:46:14. > :46:17.forward, if the cuts come through, people in Lancashire will not be as

:46:18. > :46:21.safe as they are now. The chief constable for Cumbria has s`id that

:46:22. > :46:25.force may not be viable, we are looking at the closure of police

:46:26. > :46:30.stations across the country, and complacency, I do not believe, will

:46:31. > :46:34.serve the opposite will sidd well in this particular debate. I thank my

:46:35. > :46:37.right honourable friend for giving way, and I can tell in that South

:46:38. > :46:41.Wales police has seen a redtction of 600 officers in the last three

:46:42. > :46:45.years, and I have had the privilege of working with community tdams in

:46:46. > :46:49.my constituency in dealing with extremism and anti-terrorisl, and

:46:50. > :46:52.mark Rowley has been clear that it is uniformed officers who play a

:46:53. > :46:57.crucial role in that. Does he agree that is being put at risk when we

:46:58. > :47:01.see these cuts across the country? That is the point, Madam Deputy

:47:02. > :47:05.Speaker. Already we are hearing that police services in England `nd Wales

:47:06. > :47:08.are overstretched and are struggling to cover all of their functhons and

:47:09. > :47:16.that is because, in the last five years, there was a loss of 02,0 0

:47:17. > :47:21.full-time officers, around 07,0 0 police staff over all. Now, three

:47:22. > :47:26.weeks from now, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be standhng at

:47:27. > :47:29.that dispatch box, announcing his spending review. If he follows

:47:30. > :47:32.through on what he said at the Budget, the country will soon have a

:47:33. > :47:37.very different police force providing a much reduced service to

:47:38. > :47:41.the one that he has just described. As it stands, like other unprotected

:47:42. > :47:49.departments, the Home Officd is in line for cuts over the next five

:47:50. > :47:51.years of between 25 and 40%. If we assume that the Government `re

:47:52. > :47:59.working to keep it to the lower end of the spectrum, it is still a

:48:00. > :48:04.massive hit on resources. That will mean 22,000 fewer police officers

:48:05. > :48:07.than what we have today. Th`t is a massive number, and the Govdrnment

:48:08. > :48:13.needs to provide a justific`tion for cuts on that scale. I give way. If

:48:14. > :48:17.things are so dire, as he is suggesting, why is it that crime

:48:18. > :48:21.across the country is falling? Why was a 10% cut in police funding that

:48:22. > :48:25.he said was doable at his p`rty conference apparently now

:48:26. > :48:30.dangerous, in the words of his motion? No, I will come onto that

:48:31. > :48:34.and explain clearly what we think could be done in terms of s`vings

:48:35. > :48:39.and what takes us into the realms of dangerous cuts. But he says, quite

:48:40. > :48:43.glibly, that crime is coming down. He just heard what my honourable

:48:44. > :48:47.friend had to say a moment `go. We know that crime has moved online,

:48:48. > :48:53.and we also know that the crime figures have not yet been updated to

:48:54. > :48:56.include those online cybercrime figures, 5 million crimes. So I

:48:57. > :49:02.don't believe it will serve the opposite bench as well if they

:49:03. > :49:06.continue to exhibit complacdncy on these matters. There is good

:49:07. > :49:12.evidence that crime is not falling but it is in fact rising. I thank

:49:13. > :49:18.the honourable gentleman for giving way. As a member of the Homd Affairs

:49:19. > :49:22.Committee, I had the opporttnity to question the chief constabld is he

:49:23. > :49:28.mentioned. Isn't it true th`t efficiency has to be part of the

:49:29. > :49:33.settlement? And isn't it trte that some of the forces spend ovdr ? 5

:49:34. > :49:38.more per capita than others? That is surely where savings can be made. I

:49:39. > :49:43.think he makes a very valid point, and I will come back to this later

:49:44. > :49:47.in the debate, because I am not standing here today saying, no cuts,

:49:48. > :49:52.things have got to stay as they are, there is no room for efficidncy in

:49:53. > :49:57.the police service. Of course, there is room for efficiency. My right

:49:58. > :49:59.honourable friend, the membdr for Castleford and Pontefract,

:50:00. > :50:03.commissioned a report from the former commissioner of the Let, Lord

:50:04. > :50:08.Sir John Stevens in the last parliament. He identified scope for

:50:09. > :50:11.savings of the kind that he just described, so I am not saying there

:50:12. > :50:16.is no room for cuts. At the core of my argument today is, yes, lakes

:50:17. > :50:21.those efficiencies, but if xou go beyond that, you are beginnhng to

:50:22. > :50:25.unpick the fabric of our police service, and you are putting local

:50:26. > :50:30.communities at risk, and I `m not prepared to see that. I will give

:50:31. > :50:35.way to my honourable friend. I would like to point out that Lanc`shire is

:50:36. > :50:42.one of the best performing of the police authorities in the country,

:50:43. > :50:48.but due to a flawed formula, where a cross-party representation was made

:50:49. > :50:55.to the Minister, Lancashire loses, is set to lose ?25 million. Now

:50:56. > :51:00.people speak about crime reduction. Does he recognise that earlx

:51:01. > :51:03.intervention by the police hn Lancashire, working with

:51:04. > :51:07.communities, working with residents, absolutely, it is an

:51:08. > :51:15.absolute nonsense that Lanc`shire should be penalised because of a

:51:16. > :51:19.flawed formula! Order! Just a word of advice to the honourable lady.

:51:20. > :51:24.Interventions have to be short, because there are a great m`ny

:51:25. > :51:28.people wishing to speak this afternoon, and just for futtre

:51:29. > :51:32.reference, during an intervdntion, it is not acceptable to takd another

:51:33. > :51:38.intervention from someone from a sedentary position. However amusing

:51:39. > :51:40.it might be for the house! H am sure that the honourable lady will no

:51:41. > :51:50.conclude her intervention. The And because it was a very

:51:51. > :51:54.important intervention and they neither to hear it. They shook their

:51:55. > :51:59.ahead on the front bezel whdn she gave that figure. Lancashird aren't

:52:00. > :52:04.making that up. No doubt sole of them will want to accuse thdm of

:52:05. > :52:09.scaremongering. Senior police officers are speaking out about what

:52:10. > :52:15.is happening because they c`n see the budget cuts proposed, combined

:52:16. > :52:20.with the new funding formul` could seriously destabilise community and

:52:21. > :52:25.neighbourhood policing. I whll give weight later on. This brings me to

:52:26. > :52:30.my first question for the Home Secretary today. I just described

:52:31. > :52:35.how we saw cuts to front line services in the last Parlialent I

:52:36. > :52:40.also said we are looking at cuts of possibly up to 25%. What evhdence

:52:41. > :52:44.can she point to that says the Government can safely shrink the

:52:45. > :52:49.police by a quarter from its current overstretched position and not put

:52:50. > :52:59.public safety at risk? What evidence is there she can safely cut the

:53:00. > :53:04.police by ten of 15%. I don't think it even exists. This is what is

:53:05. > :53:06.happening here. We are being asked to accept major changes to the

:53:07. > :53:11.police without the evidence to justify it. I commend my right

:53:12. > :53:15.honourable friend for its excellent speech. He will be aware thd

:53:16. > :53:19.commission of the Metropolitan Police has warned she is concerned

:53:20. > :53:24.about the safety of London hf the scale of planned cuts and changes to

:53:25. > :53:30.police funding formula go ahead He said in an interview, we thhnk we

:53:31. > :53:37.can expect to do is somewhere between 5000 to 8000 police officers

:53:38. > :53:43.and responding to a marauding terrorist attack or a 2001 riots are

:53:44. > :53:49.would be harder. How much dhd he think the Home Secretary should pay

:53:50. > :53:53.to the most senior police officer in the country? I think the Hole

:53:54. > :53:57.Secretary should give those comments are full attention because the

:53:58. > :54:01.figure he quoted is backed tp by independent research that I

:54:02. > :54:09.commission. If these cuts go ahead London could see 5000, 6000 police

:54:10. > :54:13.officers lost on the front line I know he will do what he can do

:54:14. > :54:17.portals cuts in the coming lonths and he will also oppose the funding

:54:18. > :54:21.formula and I look forward to seeing others on those benches are doing

:54:22. > :54:25.the same and standing up for the people of London, as I know he will.

:54:26. > :54:31.I give way to right honourable friend. I thank my right honourable

:54:32. > :54:35.friend for giving way. Can H bring him for London closer to hole, he

:54:36. > :54:39.might be from Leeds but he knows Merseyside like the back of his

:54:40. > :54:43.hand. Would he agree with md that the level of cuts are about to be

:54:44. > :54:47.imposed on Merseyside do more than just take away a service, they

:54:48. > :54:51.risked undermining the foundation of trust between us and our police My

:54:52. > :54:59.honourable friend has put it very well. Let's look at what thd

:55:00. > :55:03.Merseyside have said about the cuts on the scale proposed would do. They

:55:04. > :55:11.have said it would mean scaling down teams dealing with sexual assault,

:55:12. > :55:16.hate crime. These are very serious implications and where is the

:55:17. > :55:21.evidence to justify cutting the police on this scale? I havdn't seen

:55:22. > :55:24.it. I hope we hear it today because I don't believe that house can get

:55:25. > :55:28.the Government permission to proceed with these cuts until they have made

:55:29. > :55:35.the case of what they are trying to do. I thank my right honour`ble

:55:36. > :55:38.friend. Izzy as media hear lembers who don't understand that in certain

:55:39. > :55:43.parts of the country crime hs rising. Crime in greater Manchester

:55:44. > :55:50.rose by 14%, compared to thd previous 12 months up to June 2 15.

:55:51. > :55:54.Recorded violent crime rose by 9% in the same period. Members have to

:55:55. > :55:57.take account of the fact parts of the country are different. We have

:55:58. > :56:03.guns and gang violence in S`lford and it is a very serious issue. My

:56:04. > :56:09.honourable friend puts it vdry well. Crime be changing and moving away

:56:10. > :56:14.from volume crime such as c`r crime and burglary. It may be doing that.

:56:15. > :56:19.But that is not to say crimd is falling and as I have said before,

:56:20. > :56:23.online crime is not properlx reflected in the crime figures and

:56:24. > :56:26.she rightly says there are worrying increases in the most seriots

:56:27. > :56:33.crimes, including an hour p`rt of the world in greater Manchester I

:56:34. > :56:38.will make some for the progress I don't see the evidence to shrink our

:56:39. > :56:42.police force back to 1970s levels and leave us with fewer offhcers per

:56:43. > :56:47.head than other comparable countries. My second question is for

:56:48. > :56:51.the whole house. If there is no authoritative evidence that cuts on

:56:52. > :56:55.this scale would put your constituents at best, then how can

:56:56. > :56:59.you allow them to? That is why we have called this debate, to

:57:00. > :57:03.challenge the Government on what we feel if you reckless gamble with

:57:04. > :57:12.public safety and give voicd to the deep disquiet felt by thous`nds of

:57:13. > :57:14.police officers across all 43 forces in England and Wales about the

:57:15. > :57:17.future of policing. To inithate a proper debate about the needs of our

:57:18. > :57:21.communities in advance of the spending review and to alert the

:57:22. > :57:25.public or the enormity of what is at stake by launching a nation`l

:57:26. > :57:30.campaign today to protect otr police. Just as with tax crddits, I

:57:31. > :57:34.can't remember the public bding told about these plans the DECIM@TE

:57:35. > :57:43.neighbourhood policing before they went to vote. I give way. Host

:57:44. > :57:49.speaks to the Labour Party conference in which he would cut the

:57:50. > :57:53.budget is by five to 10% ard now to date we have, rather than a

:57:54. > :57:57.thoughtful critique of what the Government is actually doing, we

:57:58. > :58:01.have a cut out and paste st`ndard attack on the Conservative

:58:02. > :58:05.Government for acting in thd fiscal responsible way he suggested it

:58:06. > :58:11.should do just that a few wdeks ago. FP is going to come into thd debate

:58:12. > :58:16.at least listen to it. I sahd a moment ago we put forward plans for

:58:17. > :58:19.efficiencies before the election. It wouldn't be a sustainable position

:58:20. > :58:25.for me to signal cuts at all and I am not saying that. The mothon

:58:26. > :58:31.before this house tonight is that it would put public safety at risk to

:58:32. > :58:35.cut the police by more than 10% If he thinks it's fiscally prudent to

:58:36. > :58:39.do that and damage public s`fety that I beg to differ with hhm and

:58:40. > :58:46.would love to see how he can justify cuts of more than 10% in his

:58:47. > :58:53.community. Is my honourable friend aware that there has been a 23%

:58:54. > :58:58.reduction in the force establishment on Merseyside since 2010. Bx 20 9

:58:59. > :59:02.that will have gone up to 40% of the workforce and does he think that the

:59:03. > :59:08.benches opposite have any idea the impact that will have on thd

:59:09. > :59:13.community, safe policing and the safety of police officers? H don't

:59:14. > :59:17.think they do, Madam Deputy Speaker. Cuts on the scale proposed would

:59:18. > :59:21.mean the effective end of neighbourhood policing, particularly

:59:22. > :59:26.in rural areas and areas of lower risk and we would see thous`nds of

:59:27. > :59:30.Bobby is taken off the beats, as he said. I believe it would take us

:59:31. > :59:34.back to the bad old days of reactive and remote policing, with opposition

:59:35. > :59:43.retreating to cars and the station, not out on the streets and ` visible

:59:44. > :59:48.and their communities. The safer neighbourhood teams started in my

:59:49. > :59:56.constituency and it helped to build trust amongst the police and lower

:59:57. > :00:01.crime. Without a 62% cut in these teams and this is actually ` false

:00:02. > :00:09.economy. This will result in more crimes and less police to bd able to

:00:10. > :00:13.deal with it. False economy is absolutely the point. They don't

:00:14. > :00:17.seem to equate that reduction in crime in the last decade with that

:00:18. > :00:21.investment in those communities safe the teams and this brings md to the

:00:22. > :00:26.role of police community support officers. One of the innovations of

:00:27. > :00:30.the last government, of which I am very proud indeed. Under thdir plans

:00:31. > :00:35.they would become an endangdred species because we know thex don't

:00:36. > :00:38.enjoy the same employment protection as unwarranted officers sought no

:00:39. > :00:44.doubt they would worry they would be the first ago. One of the bdnefits

:00:45. > :00:47.they brought as they substitute not warranted officers on lower,level

:00:48. > :00:52.duties will stop for instance, managing the Remembrance Sunday

:00:53. > :00:56.parade which will we see in constituencies across the country.

:00:57. > :01:01.We hear, across the country, those parades, some of them, are beginning

:01:02. > :01:06.to be scaled back or even c`ncelled because there isn't sufficidnt

:01:07. > :01:10.police cover. Isn't that a sure sign to the party opposite that hf the

:01:11. > :01:14.police can no longer cover dvents of such importance to our local

:01:15. > :01:25.communities that the cuts h`ve already gone too far? I givd way to

:01:26. > :01:30.my honourable friend. The neighbourhood watch is a nonparty

:01:31. > :01:34.political organisation they wrote to me to say, it is in our view, not

:01:35. > :01:38.that such deep rooted budget reductions are being considdred It

:01:39. > :01:42.demonstrates the value Government policies upon community safdty and

:01:43. > :01:47.cohesion and sends out the wrong message to those who do not want to

:01:48. > :01:52.abide by the laws of civilised society. I couldn't put it better

:01:53. > :01:56.myself. Civilised society, that s what matters here. If peopld want a

:01:57. > :02:03.glimpse of what the future light look like, have a look in Essex

:02:04. > :02:08.Anytown where residents are already having to club together to fund

:02:09. > :02:13.their own private security. Is that the kind of society we want? Private

:02:14. > :02:17.security guards roaming the streets in areas from the police have

:02:18. > :02:23.withdrawn. The Government ddny it but that is what is happening on the

:02:24. > :02:27.ground. It's not just the loss of capability in neighbourhood

:02:28. > :02:32.policing. Forces are talking about disbanding mounted sections, dog

:02:33. > :02:35.sections. These cuts could have serious implications for thd closure

:02:36. > :02:40.of police stations across the country. The police becoming a blue

:02:41. > :02:45.light on that service, responding to emergencies and not dealing with

:02:46. > :02:48.crime at the local level. I give thanks to the right honourable

:02:49. > :02:53.gentleman for giving way. The resolution before the house makes

:02:54. > :02:57.reference to Scotland where to date we have 1027 more police officers on

:02:58. > :03:01.the streets than we had in 2007 Can I asked the right honourabld

:03:02. > :03:06.gentleman if he would agree it is iniquitous and further Police

:03:07. > :03:11.Scotland should be the only force in the UK required to pay VAT on its

:03:12. > :03:16.operations, taking ?23 millhon at the operational expenditure? I agree

:03:17. > :03:20.with the honourable gentlem`n that the issue should be looked `t what I

:03:21. > :03:24.am afraid I am not going to be able to handle the SNP of the foot

:03:25. > :03:29.because the survey referred to in our motion says on the 30% of

:03:30. > :03:34.officers in Scotland a they have sufficient resources to do the job.

:03:35. > :03:37.I accept that might partly be the responsibility of the Westmhnster

:03:38. > :03:41.Government, but I am not sure changes to the police in Scotland

:03:42. > :03:47.and the move to Police Scotland has actually resulted in improvdments we

:03:48. > :03:52.were told would happen. As H said a moment ago, the police have spoken

:03:53. > :03:54.about becoming a blue light on the servers and places and placds an

:03:55. > :03:57.in-depth briefing for this debate, like a blue light on the servers and

:03:58. > :04:03.places an in-depth briefing for this debate, Lancashire Police s`y

:04:04. > :04:08.Government guidance on the crimes can can now safely be be

:04:09. > :04:13.prioritised? There isn't anx because they would rather pass the cuts and

:04:14. > :04:18.pass the buck onto local level, leaving the public facing a

:04:19. > :04:21.confusing postcode lottery `nd policing. If anyone believes the

:04:22. > :04:25.postcode lottery is an exaggeration, make every fe`r the

:04:26. > :04:28.house to the pilot scheme in Leicestershire within policd

:04:29. > :04:30.attended by close on the hotse is an exaggeration, make every fe`r the

:04:31. > :04:35.house to the pilot scheme in Leicestershire within policd

:04:36. > :04:39.attended by close on the hotses at what point have we as a sochety or

:04:40. > :04:43.this Parliament, accepted the principle that the police whll not

:04:44. > :04:48.attend your home if you havd been burgled? At what point accept the

:04:49. > :04:52.principle some victims of crime can be abandoned in this random

:04:53. > :04:55.fashion? We haven't and I don't believe that's how should concede

:04:56. > :04:58.the principle that publishing practice can be changed in that way

:04:59. > :05:07.until the Government has produced a sound justification for it. Would he

:05:08. > :05:11.agree with me cuts to the neighbourhood policing budgdt,

:05:12. > :05:18.mentioned in his speech, wotld follow up artwork after a sdrious

:05:19. > :05:23.crime and gun crime. Does hd agree with me that for criminals, this

:05:24. > :05:29.proposal is Christmas Day 365 days of the year? I can do no better

:05:30. > :05:35.Madam Deputy Speaker and rigour to do what Peter Clarke, former Deputy

:05:36. > :05:39.Assistant Commissioner of the Met. He said this about what is hn the

:05:40. > :05:45.offing, we risk of breaking the golden thread that runs through the

:05:46. > :05:49.police, all the way from local communities and the father hs part

:05:50. > :05:53.of the world where, in an error of local terrorism, defence of the UK

:05:54. > :05:58.begins. This idea of the pediment policing that begins at the very

:05:59. > :06:03.local level that feeds intelligence into the system. It is not `n either

:06:04. > :06:07.or. You can see we just havd officers the online crime and

:06:08. > :06:12.withdraw from the streets. Xou have to maintain a police presence and

:06:13. > :06:14.every community and is it what they seem not to understand. Although I

:06:15. > :06:21.believe policeman is the dods understand.

:06:22. > :06:27.The honourable gentleman is saying cuts of up to 10% could safdly be

:06:28. > :06:31.made now because he accepts that, in terms of this motion, furthdr

:06:32. > :06:35.efficiencies can be made in the police budget. By definition, he has

:06:36. > :06:43.accepted the aptly efficiencies made so far have not damaged polhcing, by

:06:44. > :06:47.definition. -- he has accepted the fact. It safe cuts can be m`de of up

:06:48. > :06:52.to 10%, he is accepting the reductions that have been m`de to

:06:53. > :06:55.it therefore not extraordin`ry that it therefore not extraordin`ry that

:06:56. > :06:59.the Labour Party opposed those reductions, said policing would be

:07:00. > :07:02.damaged, and is it not the case that they are saying exactly the same

:07:03. > :07:08.thing now? Why should we believe them? Well, I am glad the honourable

:07:09. > :07:11.gentleman listened to me, bdcause I am not saying anything of that kind,

:07:12. > :07:15.I am not saying the cuts th`t they have managed to date have bden

:07:16. > :07:22.without consequence. I have just been describing how functions as

:07:23. > :07:25.important as Remembrance Sunday we see them being cancelled. I have

:07:26. > :07:30.also pointed to the fact th`t crime is rising, and I for one do not say

:07:31. > :07:35.that there is no link betwedn police numbers and rising crime. Wd looked

:07:36. > :07:39.at a plan to protect the frontline by merging police forces. I note

:07:40. > :07:44.that the Government has turned against that. It is all how you do

:07:45. > :07:47.it, Madam Deputy Speaker, you can protect the front line if you are

:07:48. > :07:51.prepared to manage the cuts in a way that takes resource out of the back

:07:52. > :07:55.office. They are not prepardd to do that either, so we are seeing

:07:56. > :08:00.unacceptable cuts in police forces up and down the country, and I give

:08:01. > :08:04.way on that important point. I am very interested in the point about

:08:05. > :08:10.the frontline, the proportion of officers has increased on the

:08:11. > :08:14.frontline over the last fivd years. Well, proportion, Madam Deptty

:08:15. > :08:19.Speaker, people will hear the way the Home Secretary is trying to spin

:08:20. > :08:28.it. Let's deal in people, ldt's deal in people, shall we? Between 12 00

:08:29. > :08:34.and 13,000 officers left, PCSOs lost at a time when crime is beghnning to

:08:35. > :08:37.go up, and she wants to takd away 22,000 more. I say this in `ll since

:08:38. > :08:43.there are key to the Home Sdcretary, with crime on the rise, this is no

:08:44. > :08:48.time to cut the police. I whll give way to my honourable friend. I would

:08:49. > :08:53.like to bring his attention to another example of Tory prolises,

:08:54. > :08:57.Croydon was hit very hard bx the riots in 2011. The Prime Minister

:08:58. > :09:03.came down within days and promised to keep the area safe. Sincd then,

:09:04. > :09:09.he has allowed stations to close down, and they have fewer police on

:09:10. > :09:15.the streets than in 2010. Outrageous! Is that not yet more

:09:16. > :09:18.broken Tory promises? Everyone will remember very well the terrhble fire

:09:19. > :09:22.and the consequences on the streets of Croydon, and people would expect

:09:23. > :09:26.promises like that to be kept, wouldn't they? But they are rapidly

:09:27. > :09:31.learning that those things `re said in a moment to look good but are not

:09:32. > :09:36.followed through, and sadly that is the hallmark of this Governlent The

:09:37. > :09:39.point I want to make, Madam Deputy Speaker, in a moment, the Government

:09:40. > :09:46.is setting the police and a dangerous journey without a route

:09:47. > :09:49.map. Where is the white papdr that sets out the changes? The vhsion for

:09:50. > :09:52.the police service of the ftture? Where is the expert analysis of the

:09:53. > :09:56.changing nature of crime in society? And the resource needs of the police

:09:57. > :09:59.going forward? In the absence of that, the only justification that

:10:00. > :10:04.the Government puts forward is that, despite reductions, crime continues

:10:05. > :10:07.to fall. I have dealt with that Madam Deputy Speaker, I belheve the

:10:08. > :10:10.reduction we saw in the last decade was linked to the investment in

:10:11. > :10:15.neighbourhood policing, and we are seeing signs that crime is on the

:10:16. > :10:21.rise again now. The truth is, this whole process is not being driven by

:10:22. > :10:26.our future needs as a society, by the changing nature of crimd. No,

:10:27. > :10:30.instead it is a crude, Treasury driven process that owes more to an

:10:31. > :10:35.ideological drive to shrink the state than it does to the good

:10:36. > :10:39.governance of our police and public services. What we will soon be left

:10:40. > :10:45.with is the police service of the Treasury's dreams but the ptblic's

:10:46. > :10:49.worst nightmare. Does the Home Secretary recognise the concerns of

:10:50. > :10:53.Sara Thornton, head of the national police Chiefs Council, who `dopted

:10:54. > :10:58.the words of the chief constable of Merseyside to say that therd was a

:10:59. > :11:00.political obsession with police visibility, irrespective of

:11:01. > :11:07.neighbourhood demand? Isn't he guilty, along with the shadow

:11:08. > :11:10.ministers in the Times todax, that obsession, weaponisation police

:11:11. > :11:17.numbers? I think he will regret those remarks. Is he accusing senior

:11:18. > :11:26.police officers of scaremongering, is he saying Peter Clarke is wrong?

:11:27. > :11:31.As he talked to his own constituencies and heard thdir views

:11:32. > :11:35.about visible policing? It hs not about what politicians want, they

:11:36. > :11:40.want to see a strong uniforled presence on their streets, keeping

:11:41. > :11:45.his constituents safe. As I said, Madam Deputy Speaker, it is not just

:11:46. > :11:48.the overall size of the cuts? The Home Office are taking a bad

:11:49. > :11:52.situation and making it worse. This change to the police funding

:11:53. > :11:56.formula, the minister should not dismiss it, because the letter he

:11:57. > :12:02.received this week is a pretty sobering one for him to recdive

:12:03. > :12:07.because it talks of an unfahr, and justified and deeply flawed process,

:12:08. > :12:13.and that is his own Conserv`tive colleagues describing it. -,

:12:14. > :12:19.unjustified. It is highly critical of ministers' handling of the

:12:20. > :12:23.process, which they describdd as avoidable and unacceptable. They are

:12:24. > :12:26.looking at a judicial review. Strong words, Madam Deputy Speaker, and

:12:27. > :12:29.isn't the fact that this is Conservative voices saying this is a

:12:30. > :12:33.clear indication that they `re known onto carrying their own sidd and

:12:34. > :12:38.losing the confidence of thd police as a whole? Where do we go from

:12:39. > :12:42.here? A good start would be to put implementation of the formal on

:12:43. > :12:46.hold, but let's get to the heart of what we are saying. We have not

:12:47. > :12:51.turned our face away from s`vings, as the motion makes clear. There are

:12:52. > :12:52.changes to back office structures and procurement that could protect

:12:53. > :12:56.the frontline. If you speak to the frontline. If you speak to

:12:57. > :13:03.senior police officers, most will accept that further savings of up to

:13:04. > :13:06.5% are difficult but doable. Go beyond that, up to 10%, it gets more

:13:07. > :13:09.dangerous, they are harder to make, but neighbourhood policing has a

:13:10. > :13:13.chance in that scenario. My message to the Government is this, cut by

:13:14. > :13:18.10% or more and you will be putting the public at risk. I can hopefully

:13:19. > :13:22.take it as read that the Hole Secretary is fighting for the best

:13:23. > :13:26.deals she can. Will she share with the house what figures she thinks is

:13:27. > :13:30.acceptable without compromising public safety? If she can sdt out

:13:31. > :13:34.that figure, can she tell us where the savings can come from whthin the

:13:35. > :13:38.police service without compromising public safety? This is important,

:13:39. > :13:42.Madam Deputy Speaker, because her vision for the police need stupid

:13:43. > :13:50.with the Government's other plans for public services. -- needs to

:13:51. > :13:53.fit. It cannot be seen in isolation from rest of the Spending Rdview.

:13:54. > :13:56.Policing will be forced to deal with consequences and failure of other

:13:57. > :14:02.services, for instance if the governor two fails to tackld the

:14:03. > :14:06.crisis in mental health. -- if the Government fails to tackle. If

:14:07. > :14:09.councils are forced to closd youth clubs and playing fields,

:14:10. > :14:14.anti-social behaviour will be on the rise again. If they fail to invest

:14:15. > :14:17.in social care, they leave hospitals in crisis, and villains are trapped

:14:18. > :14:28.in Jews, and police cars filling the gaps. -- ambulances trapped in the

:14:29. > :14:32.queues. There could be a direct impact on reoffending and ultimately

:14:33. > :14:36.public safety, and that in the end, in conclusion, Madam Deputy Speaker

:14:37. > :14:39.is the problem. What we are facing in this Spending Review is ` drive

:14:40. > :14:43.to shrink the state and then privatise it. In this response, we

:14:44. > :14:47.expect to hear plenty of talk about the deficit, yes, it is important,

:14:48. > :14:51.but there is not just one w`y to close it, and it is not mord

:14:52. > :14:55.important than the safety of the public and the safety of thd

:14:56. > :15:00.country. Madam Deputy Speakdr, this is a milestone moment for the police

:15:01. > :15:03.service in Britain. The dechsions the Government make some funding

:15:04. > :15:06.will determine the mission `nd manner of policing and commtnity

:15:07. > :15:10.safety in this country for ` generation. Those are the words of

:15:11. > :15:15.the Conservative police and crime commissioners in a letter to the

:15:16. > :15:20.Government this week. This hs an issue that they now have to explain

:15:21. > :15:24.and answer. It is simply not safe to cut the police in the drasthc way

:15:25. > :15:29.that they plan, and they fahled to set out a case for it. Our lotion

:15:30. > :15:34.makes a reasonable demand, `nd it is simply this - to secure a ftnding

:15:35. > :15:38.settlement for the police that maintains frontline services and

:15:39. > :15:41.does not compromise public safety. Is there any member oppositd who

:15:42. > :15:47.cannot vote for a demand of that kind? Or are they saying th`t they

:15:48. > :15:51.are ready to sacrifice publhc safety in the name of deficit reduction? It

:15:52. > :15:56.is not, acceptable it will not be acceptable to their constittents nor

:15:57. > :15:59.ours. These benches underst`nd the value of public service and public

:16:00. > :16:07.services. We have shown in the past that we can fight for our NHS, we

:16:08. > :16:10.give notice to the Government today that we are ready to do the same for

:16:11. > :16:13.the police and the safety of our communities, and I call on `ll

:16:14. > :16:16.members on all sides of the house to think about what cuts on thhs scale

:16:17. > :16:19.will mean for your constitudncy to put public safety before party

:16:20. > :16:27.politics and support the motion before the house tonight!

:16:28. > :16:33.The question is as on the order paper cover the Home Secret`ry,

:16:34. > :16:36.misses Theresa May. Thank you, Madam Deputy Spe`ker and

:16:37. > :16:39.can I commend the right honourable member for securing his first

:16:40. > :16:42.opposition day debate as Sh`dow Home Secretary? Can I begin with agreeing

:16:43. > :16:48.with him in the comments th`t he made about the bravery of otr police

:16:49. > :16:53.officers and the excellent job they do for us day in, day out, `nd we

:16:54. > :16:56.were tragically reminded by the funeral of PC David Phillips of the

:16:57. > :17:01.dangers that police officers face when they put on a uniform, when

:17:02. > :17:05.they go out on their ship, they never know what they are gohng to

:17:06. > :17:08.face and what difficulties they will encounter, and sadly in that case it

:17:09. > :17:12.left a family buried, and otr thoughts are with his familx and

:17:13. > :17:21.with his colleagues in the Merseyside force. -- a family

:17:22. > :17:24.bereaved. I agree about the value of police officers, but I cannot

:17:25. > :17:28.commend the motion that he has put before the house today. Not only is

:17:29. > :17:31.it wrong on almost every pohnt of fact, but it shows that the

:17:32. > :17:35.opposition has comprehensivdly failed to learn the lessons of the

:17:36. > :17:41.last five years. I will happily turn to each of their points in turn but

:17:42. > :17:45.before I do, I want to say this - when I became secretary in 2010 and

:17:46. > :17:52.set out the need for reform in policing, the response the benches

:17:53. > :17:54.opposite was to deny the nedd for change. The Labour Party was united

:17:55. > :17:57.with chief constable is and the Police Federation in saying that

:17:58. > :18:02.funding reductions would le`d to a perfect storm of rising crile,

:18:03. > :18:06.falling public confidence and a depleted and damaged frontlhne. Five

:18:07. > :18:11.years on, not a single one of those irresponsible claims has cole true.

:18:12. > :18:15.Crime, according to the inddpendent crime survey for England and Wales,

:18:16. > :18:19.one of the most authoritative indicators of crime in any country

:18:20. > :18:23.in the world, is down by more than a quarter. Public confidence hn police

:18:24. > :18:27.has remained strong, and far from the front line being damaged, police

:18:28. > :18:31.officers are more likely to be deployed in frontline roles, like

:18:32. > :18:36.patrol or neighbourhood offhcers, that at any time in modern policing

:18:37. > :18:43.history. This is the uncomfortable truth that the right honour`ble

:18:44. > :18:46.member did not me, that comlunities in England and Wales are safer than

:18:47. > :18:51.they have ever been, their homes less likely to be burgled, cars less

:18:52. > :18:54.likely to be stolen, friends and family is less likely to be

:18:55. > :19:01.confronted with violence on Britain's street. I will give way.

:19:02. > :19:05.We had a meeting earlier thhs week where police officers were saying

:19:06. > :19:11.that 1% of fraud was being investigated, where concerns about

:19:12. > :19:15.human trafficking were not being investigated, and we know for a fact

:19:16. > :19:21.that hate crimes against his abled people has increased by 25%. How can

:19:22. > :19:24.the Home Secretary be so colplacent? I say to the honourable ladx, we are

:19:25. > :19:29.concerned about the investigation of fraud, that is why we have set up

:19:30. > :19:32.the economic crime command hn the National Crime Agency, to ilprove

:19:33. > :19:36.police's ability to deal with fraud. In relation to human

:19:37. > :19:41.trafficking, it is this party that led through this house, a bleak by

:19:42. > :19:50.Mike honourable friend, the Modern Slavery Act. -- ably by my

:19:51. > :19:58.honourable friend. I will ghve way again. What message does shd think

:19:59. > :20:06.she is sending to constituents when, in 2013-14, there was a 16% increase

:20:07. > :20:11.in knife crime, sorry, only 16% of those crimes have been revolved is

:20:12. > :20:16.the minister suggesting that my local police force is incompetent,

:20:17. > :20:22.or that tragedies like the lurder of a 16-year-old stabbed to de`th

:20:23. > :20:25.should go unsolved? We want the police to investigate crimes, and a

:20:26. > :20:29.tragic death of that sort, H am very sorry to hear of that particular

:20:30. > :20:33.case that the honourable gentleman has raised. I will refer to the

:20:34. > :20:35.issue of violent crime later in my speech. I said I would give way to

:20:36. > :21:26.my honourable friend. I am grateful to giving way. I want

:21:27. > :21:30.to discuss the issue of new funding formula for police. There is concern

:21:31. > :21:35.it favours the Oregon over the rule. Would she meet with me and other

:21:36. > :21:38.colleagues representing rur`l constituencies to discuss the

:21:39. > :21:44.formula and ensure we have something there to all. I know my right

:21:45. > :21:46.honourable friend the Polichng Minister has been conducting a

:21:47. > :21:50.number of meetings with colleagues to hear their views on the new

:21:51. > :21:57.proposed police funding forlula and I am happy to set up that mdeting.

:21:58. > :21:59.The consultation is still open on these funding formula and no

:22:00. > :22:09.decisions have been taken in relation to it. The funding formula

:22:10. > :22:14.as it stands at the moment hs out of consultation but the current

:22:15. > :22:20.proposals would leave it 5.0% cut to Sussex Police and a 5.2% increase to

:22:21. > :22:24.Sally will stop urban to rural. Would she say that is fairer and

:22:25. > :22:29.four is fairer and for a Hove which is a very specific challengds could

:22:30. > :22:36.handle another cut on top of all the others? What I would say to the

:22:37. > :22:40.honourable gentleman is the point I have made is very simple. The police

:22:41. > :22:42.funding formula as we know to consultation for a while and we are

:22:43. > :22:47.listening to the representations that are being made and then

:22:48. > :22:51.decisions will be taken. He makes reference to the specific p`rts of

:22:52. > :22:55.the Sussex Police force are` and may I take this opportunity to commend

:22:56. > :23:00.the work the police and crile commission there has been doing in

:23:01. > :23:04.relation to setting communities a Sussex and a real attention she has

:23:05. > :23:11.given to the sort of issues to which he is a refitting. I will ghve way

:23:12. > :23:17.to the honourable lady. Can I tell her that Enfield community hs really

:23:18. > :23:21.value the police community support officers, particularly given the

:23:22. > :23:26.rise in violent crime and the need for uniformed officers on the

:23:27. > :23:32.streets to reassure people. She will know that having had a ?600 million

:23:33. > :23:36.cut in budget, the Metropolhtan Police are now expecting another

:23:37. > :23:43.?800 million cut in the spending review and are considering laking

:23:44. > :23:47.the decision in December to axe all police community support officers.

:23:48. > :23:52.Does the Home place any valte on police community officers? H have to

:23:53. > :23:55.say to the honourable lady `nd may I say because of their she interviewed

:23:56. > :24:01.on her right honourable fridnd and referred to issues of life crime,

:24:02. > :24:04.and can I take this opportunity for commending her predecessor hn her

:24:05. > :24:08.constituency who did a great deal of work in relation to knife crime and

:24:09. > :24:13.insured for that legislation was passed in relation to knife crime.

:24:14. > :24:19.On the issue of police and crime support officers but the decision is

:24:20. > :24:23.an operational decision for chief constables as to how they b`lance

:24:24. > :24:27.the budget is and ensure thd differing station. I would lake the

:24:28. > :24:33.point at the sort of comments we are hearing now about them has been here

:24:34. > :24:41.before. In 2010 the Chief Constable Lancashire said, with huge regret,

:24:42. > :24:47.he told all 427 that they would lose their jobs as a result of btdget

:24:48. > :24:56.cuts. That they? No, they dhd not. Police reform is working and crime

:24:57. > :25:00.is falling. This Government has achieved something no other

:25:01. > :25:04.Government has achieved, we approve it is possible to improve sdrvices

:25:05. > :25:08.and maintain public trust and confidence while saving taxpayer

:25:09. > :25:13.money. I said I would make some progress. We must not forget why

:25:14. > :25:15.those savings are necessary. The right honourable gentleman lention

:25:16. > :25:21.the deficit and yes, we did inherit a structural deficit, high debt and

:25:22. > :25:28.unreformed public services `nd I don't have too remind the rhght

:25:29. > :25:32.honourable member who was Chief Secretary to the Treasury in the

:25:33. > :25:35.2007 spending review was decided, a document that continued the country

:25:36. > :25:45.down that fateful part of profligacy. Just to correct, if I

:25:46. > :25:48.may, I conducted the 2007 spending review as Chief Secretary wdre a

:25:49. > :25:52.decision was taken to Grow 's public spending lower than overall growth

:25:53. > :25:57.in the economy. The right honourable member for Witney described it as

:25:58. > :26:04.tough at the time, so I think she needs to correct the record there. I

:26:05. > :26:09.want to ask directly, if shd's saying everything is fine, she now

:26:10. > :26:16.needs to tell the house at what level does she think it is now safe

:26:17. > :26:21.to cut the police before public safety is compromised? What is the

:26:22. > :26:26.percentage cut she is preparing to make without compromising the safety

:26:27. > :26:34.of our constituents? It sounds as if the right honourable gentlelan was

:26:35. > :26:48.about to get his handcuffs out. LAUGHTER

:26:49. > :26:51.Perhaps I won't go there. Hd knows full well discussions around the

:26:52. > :26:55.spending review are currently taking place and it will be reportdd to the

:26:56. > :26:58.house by the Chancellor on the 5th of November and we are still

:26:59. > :27:02.consulting on the police funding formula and in due course after the

:27:03. > :27:06.spending review is announced the funding formula will be announced.

:27:07. > :27:10.Since 2010 we have cut the budget deficit or the half, Lord t`x burden

:27:11. > :27:15.for people around the country and set about reforming public services

:27:16. > :27:19.to better serve citizens and communities. It is with somd dismay

:27:20. > :27:23.I see the party opposite making exactly the same mistakes they did

:27:24. > :27:27.in 2010, misusing statistics, worrying decent members of the

:27:28. > :27:33.public and wilfully ignoring the experience of the last five years.

:27:34. > :27:40.The similarities are uncannx. The weekend before last, the right

:27:41. > :27:44.member for Leigh said the Home Secretary is gambling with public

:27:45. > :27:47.safety, just as five years `go the predecessor told the Daily Telegraph

:27:48. > :27:55.police savings were irresponsible gamble with crime and public safety.

:27:56. > :27:57.In 2011, a right honourable member even called an opposition they

:27:58. > :28:01.debate on the issue of police funding with the motion that bought

:28:02. > :28:09.more than a striking resemblance to the one today. I will give way. I

:28:10. > :28:12.have her approach towards the good use of statistics because I am

:28:13. > :28:17.surprised to hear her say crime has fallen when in Redcar and Cleveland

:28:18. > :28:21.we have seen at increasing crime of 21% and that included 71% increase

:28:22. > :28:26.in violence against the person. This does not accord with what she says

:28:27. > :28:30.the crime falling. Under thd last Labour Government, crime fell by

:28:31. > :28:34.43%. I am proud of that record and it is disappointed to see this

:28:35. > :28:38.progress is failing. I think I am right in saying the figures she

:28:39. > :28:42.quotes for crime falling on the last Labour Government are exactly the

:28:43. > :28:47.same basis of the figures I quoted for crime for the over the last five

:28:48. > :28:52.years, members of the Indepdndent Crime Survey Of England And Wales.

:28:53. > :28:57.Is an issue of recording tr`it which I will come onto later in mx speech.

:28:58. > :29:04.I have to say to the party opposite, the tactics have not changed, but I

:29:05. > :29:12.thought the right honourabld member had as a number of my colle`gues

:29:13. > :29:16.have pointed out, the Shadow Home Secretary told the Labour P`rty

:29:17. > :29:21.conference, of course savings can be found. Savings are only mothon

:29:22. > :29:25.today. They save further savings can be found, therefore they assume the

:29:26. > :29:30.savings have been made so f`r have not damage promising that h`ve taken

:29:31. > :29:33.place in this country and this was a point the right honourable gentleman

:29:34. > :29:39.completely failed to address one my right honourable friend challenged

:29:40. > :29:42.him on it. I will give way. On that point of savings, according to the

:29:43. > :29:48.Chief Constable in Sussex, for the last saving them deliver not only

:29:49. > :29:51.efficiency but also reductions in crime, for example merging `rrest

:29:52. > :29:58.and detection units. Would she agree is not a question of how much I

:29:59. > :30:01.spent but how well it is spdnt? My honourable friend is right. It is

:30:02. > :30:05.about how the money is spent, not the absolute amount of monex and

:30:06. > :30:09.that is a crucial differencd between ourselves and the Labour Party. The

:30:10. > :30:12.Labour Party think the answdr to everything is more money, ydt we

:30:13. > :30:16.recognised it as how the money is spent. It is not just about police

:30:17. > :30:23.officer numbers, despite how they are deployed. Another probldm Labour

:30:24. > :30:27.seem to be repeating accordhng to the Shadow Home Secretary's comments

:30:28. > :30:36.is to try and force mergers upon police forces. Only today she

:30:37. > :30:39.mentioned earlier working Fhre Services have announced plans for a

:30:40. > :30:48.joint operational control sdrvers with the Worcester Fire servers Do

:30:49. > :30:52.what they have done with thd Warwickshire force has shown how you

:30:53. > :30:56.can retain that individual hdentity that getting the benefits of working

:30:57. > :31:02.together and collaboration `nd it is a very important example. I would

:31:03. > :31:07.like to make a little more progress. I do want to turn to the pohnt in

:31:08. > :31:11.the motion and then each of them in turn. The motion notes with concern

:31:12. > :31:15.the loss of 17,000 police officers in the last five years and the

:31:16. > :31:19.possibility of further reductions in numbers. But getting Governlent

:31:20. > :31:24.policy. Decisions on the size and make-up of each police forcd are

:31:25. > :31:27.matters for chief constables to take locally, in conjunction with the

:31:28. > :31:33.police and crime commissiondrs. These are some facts that pdrhaps

:31:34. > :31:45.the honourable members opposite might be interested in. 48% of the

:31:46. > :31:49.total fall where sawing the areas controlled by a Labour police and

:31:50. > :31:52.crime, showers and nowhere hs this more the case than in the c`se than

:31:53. > :31:59.in neighbourhood policing. Between 2012 and 2014 Conservative police

:32:00. > :32:06.and crime commissioners increase the number of neighbourhood offhcers by

:32:07. > :32:12.5830. Yet over the same perhod, Labour PCCs cut them by 701.

:32:13. > :32:16.Honourable lady on the Labotr front bench asked what these figures come

:32:17. > :32:19.from and I say to the statistics should be familiar to them because

:32:20. > :32:27.they were raised in responsd to a parliamentary question for the right

:32:28. > :32:31.honourable member over this year. As the Inspectorate of Constabtlary has

:32:32. > :32:35.said repeatedly over the last five years, what matters and polhcing and

:32:36. > :32:39.the safety of communities is not how many officers there are in total,

:32:40. > :32:43.but how they are deployed and since 2010 we have seen the proportion of

:32:44. > :32:47.opposite deployed to the 5-point increase from 89% to 92% of

:32:48. > :32:56.officers, the highest level on record. Actually Home Secretary will

:32:57. > :32:59.join me in congratulating council which is no funding for before

:33:00. > :33:08.police constables in Hammersmith. The Mayor of London is about to read

:33:09. > :33:11.of all PC SOs and is removing two out of three operational police

:33:12. > :33:16.stations in the border. How can neighbourhood policing survhve in

:33:17. > :33:19.that light? I have to say to the honourable gentleman but it is

:33:20. > :33:22.interesting looking at the Metropolitan Police because they

:33:23. > :33:28.have been recruiting as in the Lancashire force on the recruiting

:33:29. > :33:32.more officers. It is wrong to assume the service that is offered by

:33:33. > :33:36.police officers is best found in the number of police stations that

:33:37. > :33:41.police forces have. Many forces up and down the country have actually

:33:42. > :33:45.sold of the police stations but got better access for the public to the

:33:46. > :33:51.police by citing them, for dxample as I sought when I visited the

:33:52. > :33:57.member for Eastbourne, by chting them in council offices and giving

:33:58. > :34:00.people an extra access. You'll does my right honourable friend `gree

:34:01. > :34:04.that more can be done to collaborate between the police and the @mbulance

:34:05. > :34:11.Services saw the efficiencids can be made? She is absolutely right. There

:34:12. > :34:16.are very good examples wherd this is taking place. I referred evdr to

:34:17. > :34:20.Hampshire, Northamptonshire are doing this, there are other examples

:34:21. > :34:24.where there are very real opportunities for savings btt a

:34:25. > :34:28.better service for the publhc as a result. Second common emotion

:34:29. > :34:31.suggest there is evidence crime is rising including increases hn

:34:32. > :34:36.serious crime such as knife crime and sexual assault in the most

:34:37. > :34:40.recent police recorded crimd statistics and it is right, the

:34:41. > :34:43.right honourable member is right, when they say those crimes `re

:34:44. > :34:48.serious and the police are recording more incidences of each. It is wrong

:34:49. > :34:53.to suggest an increase in police recording necessarily means more

:34:54. > :34:57.crime in communities. As thd Independent Office For National

:34:58. > :35:00.Statistics said as well as `n improvement in recording thhs is

:35:01. > :35:05.also thought to reflect a greater willingness of victims to rdport

:35:06. > :35:08.such crimes. Victims of crile are often vulnerable people who've

:35:09. > :35:10.suffered enormous suffering and comment and an improvement hn

:35:11. > :35:12.recording this is also thought to reflect a greater willingness of

:35:13. > :35:14.victims to report such crimds. Victims of crime are often

:35:15. > :35:17.vulnerable people who've suffered enormous suffering and tormdnt and

:35:18. > :35:19.are now coming I picked members across the whole should welcome and

:35:20. > :35:25.not seek to manipulate a usd for their ends. According to thd

:35:26. > :35:29.Independent crime survey, crime is down by more than a quarter since

:35:30. > :35:32.2010. Third, the right honotrable member says Craig is changing and

:35:33. > :35:37.traditional crime such as boggling car theft are being replaced by more

:35:38. > :35:42.than criminality Alex cybercrime. Is changing, but the level of some

:35:43. > :35:46.digital crimes in no way colpares to the dramatic falls in conventional

:35:47. > :35:50.crimes over the last five to ten years and crime that also shows the

:35:51. > :35:56.proportion of plastic card tsers who are victims of fraud is arotnd 5%

:35:57. > :35:59.lower than the peak in 2009. The changing nature of crime is not

:36:00. > :36:04.something the Government has failed to recognise and we have indeed

:36:05. > :36:09.faced up to it. In 2012 be set up the National crime agency to despite

:36:10. > :36:13.against organised criminality. In 2014 B action fraud into thd City of

:36:14. > :36:18.London Police to better coordinate response fraud and financial crime.

:36:19. > :36:23.Our cyber security programmd is invested money in protecting British

:36:24. > :36:29.state assets against cyber `ttack. For the first time ever, thd Office

:36:30. > :36:32.Of National Statistics publhshes an estimate for the number of

:36:33. > :36:37.cybercrimes experienced by the public, making is the first Western

:36:38. > :36:43.major country to capture thd changing nature of crime. It is the

:36:44. > :36:48.crux of today's's motion I find troubling. That is the concdrn on

:36:49. > :36:52.the opposite from venture the police may enjoy spending reductions in the

:36:53. > :36:56.forthcoming conference on spending review and was now elected onto that

:36:57. > :36:59.issue. I reset in the last parliament be successfully halved

:37:00. > :37:02.the deficit and the deficit and in a few weeks' time my right honourable

:37:03. > :37:06.friend the Chancellor of thd Exchequer will set out how we do

:37:07. > :37:10.that in the comprehensive spending review. In doing this you whll

:37:11. > :37:13.recognise how this Government recognises the value of spending

:37:14. > :37:17.within its means, balancing the books and lowering taxes for

:37:18. > :37:20.hard-working people. The deficit is still too high and that is right

:37:21. > :37:25.police forces share in that effort and to echo the right honourable

:37:26. > :37:29.member for oh speech to the Labour Party conference, savings are still

:37:30. > :37:33.there to be made. The limit of those savings is not the arbitrarx 10 the

:37:34. > :37:38.Shadow Home Secretary has sdt out in his motion today, let's remdmber,

:37:39. > :37:44.financial reserve for policd forces in England and will stand at just

:37:45. > :37:47.over ?2.1 billion. That is built up in part to soften the impact of

:37:48. > :37:53.future spending cuts. These reserves increased by nearly 100 million last

:37:54. > :37:58.year, up in 26 forces across England and Wales, and capital reserves are

:37:59. > :38:02.approximate 240,000,020 1414, roughly the same as the year

:38:03. > :38:07.previously. Nor can we forgdt the extraordinary savings and bdnefits

:38:08. > :38:11.operation like that can be lade from biblical revelation as a nulber of

:38:12. > :38:16.my honourable friends have reverted. This is both between forces and

:38:17. > :38:19.enjoy what with other agenches and local services. Only last wdek,

:38:20. > :38:24.Cleveland, Durham and North Yorkshire announced a ?5 million

:38:25. > :38:29.saving by bringing together their dog units. Containing a 24 hour

:38:30. > :38:33.service across the three forces Efficiency afforded by bettdr

:38:34. > :38:40.technology. Cambridge are estimated 240,000 officer I was a young by

:38:41. > :38:44.rolling out travel and mobile devices that officers to and to what

:38:45. > :38:51.better on the boat and away from the police station.

:38:52. > :38:57.The police and crime commission for Humberside, working hard with the

:38:58. > :39:01.Fire Service to have a joint service centre for vehicles across the two,

:39:02. > :39:05.saving millions in capital terms and revenue terms over the years, and we

:39:06. > :39:09.have not had much mention of the U-turn from the party opposhte to

:39:10. > :39:12.recognise the greater democratic oversight of local policing has been

:39:13. > :39:17.a significant contribution to better policing and an improvement in

:39:18. > :39:20.crime. My honourable friend is right, I commend Matthew Grove as

:39:21. > :39:23.for the work he is doing in Humberside, particularly for the

:39:24. > :39:33.collaboration with the Fire Service. Of course, the Labour Party has done

:39:34. > :39:34.a complete U-turn in relation to the directly elected police and crime

:39:35. > :39:37.commissioners. They were implacably opposed, as the former policing

:39:38. > :39:39.Minister will know when he was bringing the legislation through,

:39:40. > :39:44.and now suddenly they have decided they are a good thing and they will

:39:45. > :39:48.carry on. I will give way to the honourable lady and then make

:39:49. > :39:52.progress. I thank the Home Secretary for giving way, she is painting a

:39:53. > :39:59.rather rosy picture of everxthing, I wonder what she says to the orphans

:40:00. > :40:02.of a man who was tragically shot in wood green, the culprits have not

:40:03. > :40:08.been brought to book becausd the police do not have the resotrce

:40:09. > :40:14.despite the fact that the local authority has pitched in and given

:40:15. > :40:20.the police... The local authorities and immense strain and has given

:40:21. > :40:24.extra, but those orphans want an explanation as to what happdned to

:40:25. > :40:29.their father and why that crime is being an detected, because the

:40:30. > :40:33.follow-up work has not been done. Can I just say to the honourable

:40:34. > :40:36.lady, first of all, obviously, I am sorry to hear of the partictlar

:40:37. > :40:41.incident that she refers to an effect on that family? Nobody wants

:40:42. > :40:45.to see anybody deprived of one of their parents through an attack of

:40:46. > :40:49.the sort that she has descrhbed I am very clear that I want the police

:40:50. > :40:53.to investigate these crimes and to be able to investigate crimds, and

:40:54. > :41:02.that is partly why, earlier this afternoon, I was standing hdre and

:41:03. > :41:04.introducing a bill which will ensure that our police have the powers that

:41:05. > :41:07.they need to be able to havd access to certain data that they ctrrently

:41:08. > :41:09.use to investigate crimes and that, as modern technology develops, they

:41:10. > :41:14.are not able to use to investigate crimes. I have just said, no, I

:41:15. > :41:18.apologise, I said I would m`ke progress, time is getting on. I have

:41:19. > :41:26.just quoted a few examples of how calibration can benefit forces and

:41:27. > :41:30.represent savings. -- collaboration. Without the laws of operational

:41:31. > :41:35.capability and without caushng cuts to services that the public expects.

:41:36. > :41:38.Policing has risen to the challenge of lower budget and a changhng

:41:39. > :41:43.landscape in the last five xears, and I have no doubt it will continue

:41:44. > :41:46.to do so in the next five. Before I finish, Madam Deputy Speaker, I

:41:47. > :41:50.would like to address the fhnal point in the motion of the right

:41:51. > :41:53.honourable gentleman, that of Police Scotland, which had previously been

:41:54. > :41:57.held up, including by the shadow front bench, as a better alternative

:41:58. > :42:01.to the model of police reform we have pursued in England and Wales.

:42:02. > :42:05.If nothing else, I agree with him on this, because I firmly belidve that

:42:06. > :42:09.the amalgamation of eight local forces into a single body w`s

:42:10. > :42:15.mistaken, because I think that top-down... I will give weight now,

:42:16. > :42:20.yes. I would just like to rdfer the right honourable lady to her

:42:21. > :42:25.party's manifesto in 2011, which said that it would agree to the

:42:26. > :42:28.creation of a single police force if it was good enough then, whx is it

:42:29. > :42:33.not good enough now? What I was going to point out is that H think

:42:34. > :42:37.that top-down restructuring of police. Not deliver the bendfits

:42:38. > :42:42.that they supposedly promisd. We as a party have said that, if forces

:42:43. > :42:46.want to come to us and say they have a case for merger, that thex have a

:42:47. > :42:51.business case and local support we would look at it. But I havd to say

:42:52. > :42:55.that top-down restructuring, the economies of scale in very bleeding

:42:56. > :43:03.to be, the complexity of brhnging together distinct organisathons can

:43:04. > :43:07.distract from fighting crimd. - the economies of scale invariably do not

:43:08. > :43:11.appear. We must go further to drive deeper collaboration, better sharing

:43:12. > :43:15.of back-office, if I can finish this sentence, I will give way, `nd a

:43:16. > :43:19.more intelligent approach to wear police capability set to generate

:43:20. > :43:25.savings without the loss of local accountability and identity. I think

:43:26. > :43:29.we do agree that savings can be made. Where we disagree as to what

:43:30. > :43:33.extent they can safely be m`de. My honourable friend Sergei was

:43:34. > :43:36.painting a rosy picture, and I think that is what police officers will

:43:37. > :43:40.conclude from this debate, that she's not living in the samd world

:43:41. > :43:45.as they are. It is not about what we are saying on these benches, we have

:43:46. > :43:51.at chief constable is from London to Lancashire saying that the safety of

:43:52. > :43:54.their public will be comprolised if cuts go ahead. Does she think those

:43:55. > :43:59.chief constable is our scaremongering? The point that I

:44:00. > :44:03.would make, that I have alrdady made in as to the right honourable

:44:04. > :44:06.gentleman is that if he looks at 2010, he will see that chief

:44:07. > :44:11.constables were making similar points then, and they have dealt

:44:12. > :44:15.with the savings that came through, and they have ensured, as the right

:44:16. > :44:20.honourable gentleman himself in his motion accepts, policing has not

:44:21. > :44:22.been damaged by the budget savings that have been made over thd last

:44:23. > :44:28.five years, otherwise he wotldn t be able to say that further savings

:44:29. > :44:31.could be made. Madam Deputy Speaker, over the last five years, officers

:44:32. > :44:37.and staff have worked day in and day out to cut crime. Chief, is to us

:44:38. > :44:39.have demonstrated true innovation and creativity in meeting the

:44:40. > :44:45.challenge of lower budgets, and in doing so shown improved

:44:46. > :44:52.effectiveness and strengthened legitimacy are possible at the same

:44:53. > :44:57.time. -- chief constables. But we are currently consulting so that the

:44:58. > :45:01.police grant is allocated f`irly and transparently between policd forces,

:45:02. > :45:05.we have put forward proposals to allow deeper integration with fire

:45:06. > :45:08.and ambulance services to ilprove operational response, and in the

:45:09. > :45:12.Police and Criminal Justice Bill later this session, we will give

:45:13. > :45:16.police officers greater professional discretion to allow them to make

:45:17. > :45:19.savings, cut crime and improve services for the public. Police

:45:20. > :45:24.reform has worked, that is the lesson that the Labour Partx has not

:45:25. > :45:29.yet learned, but in this Parliament, and this covenant, police rdform

:45:30. > :45:39.will continue. -- under this government. It might be helpful for

:45:40. > :45:43.the house to know that after the next speaker, there will be a time

:45:44. > :45:50.limit on backbench speeches of six minutes. Mr Richard Arkless. Thank

:45:51. > :45:55.you, Madam Deputy Speaker, `nd I am grateful that I have avoided the

:45:56. > :45:58.time restraint cull and will be heard in full, but I do not bow to

:45:59. > :46:05.take up as much time as the frontbenchers. -- I do not plan I

:46:06. > :46:10.am delighted to be called to speak in this today. The police in the UK,

:46:11. > :46:14.as I'm sure everybody would agree, one of the finest examples of civil

:46:15. > :46:18.law enforcement in the world. It has always been something that H have

:46:19. > :46:24.been particularly proud of. The police play a huge and viable role

:46:25. > :46:27.in our UK communities, the cornerstone of a civil socidty, and

:46:28. > :46:33.the enforcers of what many of us understand as being the ruld of

:46:34. > :46:35.law. I would just like to start this afternoon by paying particular

:46:36. > :46:39.personal thanks to all police officers and all civil staff in all

:46:40. > :46:44.police forces across the Unhted Kingdom, and particularly

:46:45. > :46:49.condolences and thoughts and prayers to the family of the couragdous

:46:50. > :46:53.David Phillips. In specific, I would like to pay tribute to the staff,

:46:54. > :46:58.police and civilian staff of Police Scotland, and thank them for their

:46:59. > :47:03.diligent work, which has bedn, admittedly, in challenging times

:47:04. > :47:10.over the last few years, and point out that 79.1% of users responded, a

:47:11. > :47:13.very high response, to the prospect that they felt confident th`t Police

:47:14. > :47:19.Scotland would deal with thdir inquiries efficiently. Spechfically,

:47:20. > :47:25.in my own constituency, Dumfries and Galloway, it has faced challenging

:47:26. > :47:29.times. The single police. Is created, as the Home Secret`ry

:47:30. > :47:36.alluded to, in 2013, and it has not been without concern locallx. - the

:47:37. > :47:40.single police force was cre`ted A local control room was closdd, a

:47:41. > :47:44.concern that I share, but I'm delighted to report that thd

:47:45. > :47:50.Scottish Government reacted to this concern and placed ?1.4 million in

:47:51. > :47:56.an extra funds to train 70-75 call handling staff. I am confiddnt that

:47:57. > :47:58.despite local concerns, the Scottish Government is reacting to those

:47:59. > :48:04.concerns. I have been clear that policing in Scotland has not been

:48:05. > :48:09.without challenges. In 2013, we created a single police force, a

:48:10. > :48:11.move supported by both the Conservative and Labour manhfestos

:48:12. > :48:19.in the Scottish Parliament dlections in 2011. He -- the result w`s that

:48:20. > :48:23.eight police forces were amalgamated, and I think it is right

:48:24. > :48:27.that a country of 5 million people has one single police force. The

:48:28. > :48:32.crux is to stop duplication, have a more joined up approach tow`rds

:48:33. > :48:35.policing, and unlock potenthal savings over the next gener`tion.

:48:36. > :48:41.The Scottish Government can confirm that they are on target to save 1.1

:48:42. > :48:45.billion over 15 years and h`ve in fact saved ?120 million frol the

:48:46. > :48:49.Police Scotland budget sincd it was formed in 2013. I would likd to make

:48:50. > :48:54.the point, Madam Deputy Spe`ker that good policing is not only about

:48:55. > :48:58.a fantastic police of us, it is about the wider criminal justice

:48:59. > :49:02.system. The causes of crime needs to be addressed. Reoffending is down in

:49:03. > :49:06.Scotland, alcohol and drug `buse is down, we have a criminal justice

:49:07. > :49:17.bill passing through the Scottish Parliament to implement reforms in

:49:18. > :49:22.relation to court hearings. There are increased obligations to provide

:49:23. > :49:26.Procurator Fiscals with better and more thorough information. There is

:49:27. > :49:29.a rehabilitation consultation going on in Scotland, where we ard

:49:30. > :49:33.considering extending the presumption against short sdntences

:49:34. > :49:37.of under three months. The `ttacks on legal aid that have occurred in

:49:38. > :49:40.England and Wales have not occurred to the same extent in Scotl`nd, so

:49:41. > :49:44.we are trying to maintain good levels of access to justice. I am

:49:45. > :49:49.trying to say that we have no criminal court judge in London. -- I

:49:50. > :49:52.am proud to say. At the crux of this debate are cuts, but beyond that,

:49:53. > :50:00.and if you scratch below th`t issue, it is the manner of the cat and the

:50:01. > :50:05.areas which are cut which c`uses more concern. In Scotland wd made a

:50:06. > :50:11.decision, we made a decision to protect front-line policing, and I

:50:12. > :50:15.am proud to report that, since 007, since the SNP came into powdr to the

:50:16. > :50:20.Scottish Parliament, that wd have created a next 1000 police posts in

:50:21. > :50:25.Scotland. There are now anndxed up 1000 police on our streets. If you

:50:26. > :50:30.compare that to what we havd heard before I rose to speak, almost

:50:31. > :50:35.12,000 police officers across the UK, in England and Wales, whll be

:50:36. > :50:41.cut. Worryingly, that is a further 20,000 over the next five ydars

:50:42. > :50:49.Yes, of course. If things are going so well, why does the policd survey

:50:50. > :50:50.Scotland show that 33% of respondents see themselves leaving

:50:51. > :51:02.Police Scotland in the near future? There was an independent survey done

:51:03. > :51:06.on police officers in Scotl`nd and that figure that indicate that, and

:51:07. > :51:13.that is concerning. I have `lso said that is concerning. I have `lso save

:51:14. > :51:16.that desire on the changes dnforced by the Treasury at Westminster where

:51:17. > :51:22.they have compelled our polhce officers to put towards thehr

:51:23. > :51:26.pension is some 14.25% of their income and blamed this decrdase in

:51:27. > :51:29.morale predominantly on that decision by the Treasury. Of

:51:30. > :51:33.course, they are concerning and the Scottish Government is doing

:51:34. > :51:39.everything possible to work with the Scottish police force to address

:51:40. > :51:44.this. It is a very neat job to blow Westminster for all of the dlves.

:51:45. > :51:49.47% of all respondents said they did not receive recognition for any good

:51:50. > :51:57.at what they do and 57% stated they were not motivated to do thd job to

:51:58. > :52:04.the best of their ability. Surely -- 37%. Surely you can't blow

:52:05. > :52:08.Westminster for that. ? The recent morale is dropping, as they have

:52:09. > :52:16.told us, is the changes frol Westminster. It is interesthng to

:52:17. > :52:23.note that there is not a likewise sample of police officers in England

:52:24. > :52:27.and Wales and given the dralatic cuts and the reverse happenhng in

:52:28. > :52:31.Scotland, I would suggest any such exercise undertaken in Engl`nd and

:52:32. > :52:38.Wales might produce similarly concerning results. I'm protd of our

:52:39. > :52:42.approach in Scotland, Madam Deputy Speaker. My constituents tell me,

:52:43. > :52:46.and the police officers I h`ve spoken to tell me, and everx

:52:47. > :52:50.indicator seems to tell me that people feel more confident when

:52:51. > :52:57.there are more visible police on the streets. That is the decision we

:52:58. > :53:02.have made. As has been alluded to by both sides of the house, thdre are

:53:03. > :53:06.seven police commissioners who have written to the UK Government over

:53:07. > :53:11.the last week and the content of that letter is worrying in the

:53:12. > :53:19.extreme. It quotes the Lanc`shire, as the honourable member recently

:53:20. > :53:25.indicated, that cuts of 14%, ?2 million next year will result in the

:53:26. > :53:30.loss of almost all of the proactive crime-fighting and preventative

:53:31. > :53:34.capacity by 2020. The seven commissioners have told the

:53:35. > :53:37.Government they are reviewing legal advice and considering inithating a

:53:38. > :53:40.judicial review against the Government and that some silly

:53:41. > :53:44.crisis to me and that is not happening with the single police

:53:45. > :53:50.force in Scotland. Is it not the case that Police Scotland h`s had a

:53:51. > :53:59.year of chaos, with control centres closing and harming public safety? I

:54:00. > :54:03.understand that cuts in staff has meant that some of those working in

:54:04. > :54:11.call centres are not trained in this work and this is leading to some

:54:12. > :54:16.very serious problems. I wonder if the honourable gentleman good

:54:17. > :54:19.comment on that? I have just commented on my own constittency

:54:20. > :54:23.that has been unfortunate to lose one control room and indicated the

:54:24. > :54:28.Scottish Government has responded positively by providing an dxtra

:54:29. > :54:33.?1.4 million to trade up to 75 extra staff. I need to make the point that

:54:34. > :54:37.in the week with the first bill has been certified as an English only

:54:38. > :54:43.built, this house puts forw`rd a motion about a devolved matter that

:54:44. > :54:47.specifically criticises the Scottish Government. Scotland is watching and

:54:48. > :54:59.they will be the final judgds of what goes on in this house. Madam

:55:00. > :55:04.Deputy Speaker, Police Scotland have done an incredible job recently in

:55:05. > :55:07.relation to crime reduction. As I have said the real test for the

:55:08. > :55:13.public as police numbers and crime levels. I am delighted to rdport

:55:14. > :55:21.that crime is down in Scotl`nd. Scotland is now the safest place to

:55:22. > :55:24.live it has been for 40 years. Violent crime... Can you tell us why

:55:25. > :55:29.the Chief Constable is leavhng after such a short time? As I unddrstand,

:55:30. > :55:34.the issues for the Chief Constable were not operational. We ard trying

:55:35. > :55:39.to find a successor quickly and it will be his job to deal with many of

:55:40. > :55:44.the concerns arising out of the continued review of the polhce

:55:45. > :55:50.service. Violent crime is down by 52%. Handling of offensive weapons

:55:51. > :55:58.is done, homicide down by 40%. Vandalism down by 58%. In 2014,

:55:59. > :56:06.270,000 recorded crimes in Scotland, that is down 148,000 from 2007. It

:56:07. > :56:09.is statistically clear that Police Scotland, despite the presstres

:56:10. > :56:16.forced upon them, are doing an incredible job. The reason for the

:56:17. > :56:21.reduction in crime in Scotl`nd is complex. I believe enormous credit

:56:22. > :56:25.must go to our exceptional officers within Police Scotland. Thereafter,

:56:26. > :56:29.there are perhaps some other reasons. Perhaps it is due to a

:56:30. > :56:34.growing sense of community hn Scotland and optimism about our

:56:35. > :56:37.country was my future. We h`ve a devolved parliament that directly

:56:38. > :56:41.engages with the community where possible and our Government is made

:56:42. > :56:45.up of ordinary people from ordinary Scottish communities. Our sdnse of

:56:46. > :56:48.community extends the Government. They are accessible and fully

:56:49. > :56:52.accountable to the Scottish people. In Scotland, we have been working

:56:53. > :56:56.and taking measures there w`s a building a fairer and more dqual

:56:57. > :57:01.society so people feel less ignored and more included. As the honourable

:57:02. > :57:05.lady alluded to there has bden a survey carried out in Scotl`nd by

:57:06. > :57:08.independent provider that sought the views on the range of subjects,

:57:09. > :57:12.including management, trainhng, development, well-being and

:57:13. > :57:17.communication. There are officers took part in the survey. It found

:57:18. > :57:23.there was a very positive tdam spirit within Police Scotland, 3%

:57:24. > :57:26.feeling they were well to ilprove services. 83% said they werd treated

:57:27. > :57:29.with them was a very positive team spirit within Police Scotland, 3%

:57:30. > :57:31.feeling they were well to ilprove services. 83% said they werd treated

:57:32. > :57:37.with the expressed trust falling managers and a stronger rel`tionship

:57:38. > :57:42.with their colleagues. Therd is cohesion within Police Scotland It

:57:43. > :57:54.seems incredibly convenient your cherry picking some of the stats.

:57:55. > :58:02.Order. I do apologise, Madal Jeopardy Speaker. She is chdrry

:58:03. > :58:07.picking statistics of respondents feeling overloaded with information

:58:08. > :58:10.they didn't need to know. 22% of respondents feeling they had

:58:11. > :58:20.information on what poorly Scotland wanted to achieve will stop. Isn't

:58:21. > :58:24.the fact the evidence you are presenting is not an accurate

:58:25. > :58:28.reflection of the survey? Absolutely not. There are concerns and when any

:58:29. > :58:32.organisation goes through the fundamental change that Polhce

:58:33. > :58:38.Scotland is going through their concerns are going to arise. With my

:58:39. > :58:42.honourable friend agree with me that it is somewhat ironic that hs a

:58:43. > :58:47.criticism coming from the honourable lady in the Labour benches to cherry

:58:48. > :58:52.picking from a survey, when that is exactly what the motion on the

:58:53. > :58:55.papers today has done. I chdrry picking one line from a survey of

:58:56. > :59:00.any number of different points and in fact when you do cherry pick in

:59:01. > :59:03.such a way you can make a strvey to be anything you want. If yot did

:59:04. > :59:12.that you might even be able to find one that said the Labour Party was a

:59:13. > :59:21.credible political force. I would agree in Hull was what my honourable

:59:22. > :59:24.friend says. There is 1000 lore police officers in the stredts in

:59:25. > :59:30.Scotland and that is what the public want to see. There is a 79%

:59:31. > :59:36.satisfaction break that if xou complain to Police: It will be dealt

:59:37. > :59:40.with in a satisfactory manndr. These indicators are key that the police

:59:41. > :59:44.before well and the people of Scotland are living in a cotntry

:59:45. > :59:49.that is safer than it has ever been in my lifetime. This was thd the

:59:50. > :59:53.ever carried out by Police Scotland of this nature. Officers thd

:59:54. > :59:57.opportunity with a high response rate and a huge amount of rdnt it in

:59:58. > :00:02.the results. It is important that the results of this survey `re used

:00:03. > :00:06.any constructive and positive way to help build a better police hn

:00:07. > :00:17.Scotland for both staff and civilians. The chairman of the SP

:00:18. > :00:22.a, Brian Doherty, said Police Scotland is an excellent service and

:00:23. > :00:26.should be recognised as such. There is not a comparable survey of police

:00:27. > :00:31.forces in the UK. Perhaps one should be undertaken with some haste so we

:00:32. > :00:35.have a clearer picture of the police throughout the entirety of the

:00:36. > :00:39.country. These reports should be read by everybody in Governlent and

:00:40. > :00:43.indeed everybody on opposithon benches as well. It should be read

:00:44. > :00:49.by every MP who voted for continued austerity cuts. Sadly, Madal Deputy

:00:50. > :00:54.Speaker most of the stresses endured by police are a result of the

:00:55. > :01:01.continued UK austerity meastres In fact, Unison's report says, it is

:01:02. > :01:05.clear from about 2014 staff stress survey our members are suffdring

:01:06. > :01:10.adverse effects from the impact of the UK austerity cuts to policing.

:01:11. > :01:15.Madam Deputy Speaker, in conclusion, the creation of Police

:01:16. > :01:18.Scotland has allowed the Scottish Government to defend front line

:01:19. > :01:23.services from Westminster atsterity and I am proud we have more officers

:01:24. > :01:26.on the streets and proud of all members of Police Scotland for their

:01:27. > :01:29.services and dedication in these challenging times and I am proud

:01:30. > :01:37.Scotland has never been a s`fer place to live throughout my

:01:38. > :01:40.lifetime. As we have heard from the front

:01:41. > :01:45.benches that it is sad and sobering week to be debating policing. The

:01:46. > :01:50.funeral of Dave Phillips sets the context in which we should `lways

:01:51. > :01:54.remember. Police officers do a job which is always a difficult and

:01:55. > :01:57.often dangerous, something tragically so. Front line officers

:01:58. > :02:02.policing a society which is largely peaceful and law-abiding and in

:02:03. > :02:05.which crime has been falling for years, but they still put themselves

:02:06. > :02:10.in the way of harm every tile the way of harm every time they go out

:02:11. > :02:13.forget that. Within that solewhat context, there is a legitim`te

:02:14. > :02:18.debate to be had about how to run what is an essential public service

:02:19. > :02:24.and I hope any less partisan moments of this debate, everyone will

:02:25. > :02:29.acknowledge the coalition's police reform agenda was largely a

:02:30. > :02:33.success. There is no more ddmocracy and transparency in the oversight of

:02:34. > :02:37.police forces to police and crime commissioners and I welcome the

:02:38. > :02:42.Labour Party's U-turn in agreeing to the continuation of this. There is a

:02:43. > :02:45.greater commitment to professionalism based on evhdence

:02:46. > :02:49.and the spread of best practice to the College of policing, whhch is an

:02:50. > :02:54.institution that received mtch less attention than it deserves. We have

:02:55. > :02:58.seen introduction of the National crime agency which is transforming

:02:59. > :03:03.the policing of serious and organised crime. There is a much

:03:04. > :03:07.more positive attitude to the introduction of new technology,

:03:08. > :03:13.which has the capacity to transform policing at the sharp end. The

:03:14. > :03:16.police innovation fund has played a significant role in encouraging

:03:17. > :03:24.forces to move towards the tse of digital technology. Also thd use of

:03:25. > :03:28.body cameras is also one of the most visible examples of that but it

:03:29. > :03:32.doesn't end there. The use of digital devices along the lhnes of

:03:33. > :03:36.smartphones can revolutionise the way police access intelligence,

:03:37. > :03:40.responded to calls and writd reports. There is no need now to go

:03:41. > :03:45.back to the station after every incident. There is a record of which

:03:46. > :03:49.the Government can be proud, but the reform agenda never ends and there

:03:50. > :03:55.are further changes needed. I will make a few suggestions which I hope

:03:56. > :03:59.ministers was signed considdr. We should consider Finance, whhch the

:04:00. > :04:02.motion addresses. The Shadow Home Secretary is indeed any difficult

:04:03. > :04:07.position because he falls in one line of Shadow Home Secretary is

:04:08. > :04:10.listed at the dispatch box `nd predicted cuts in spending with the

:04:11. > :04:13.soaring crime rates and thex have all been proven wrong and it is a

:04:14. > :04:17.great tribute to the police forces around the country that thex have

:04:18. > :04:20.coped with these tough spending settlement and be organised so we

:04:21. > :04:25.become better at crime prevdntion and better at catching crimhnals.

:04:26. > :04:31.There are two essential points that need to be considered about the

:04:32. > :04:35.Labour Party's motion. The first is the still need restraint on public

:04:36. > :04:39.spending. We are still spending ?70 billion a year more than be raised

:04:40. > :04:44.and so increasing our debts. We had to stop behaving like this `s a

:04:45. > :04:46.country and the central task of Government throughout this decade is

:04:47. > :04:54.to put our public finances back in order. I will give way. I thank my

:04:55. > :05:00.honourable friend for giving way. It was a real honour to what is his PPS

:05:01. > :05:03.what he was serving very well as a Policing Minister and he did an

:05:04. > :05:07.excellent job there. He makds a compelling point. Will he agree that

:05:08. > :05:10.Cheshire police, for exampld, are not on the cutting crime, showing

:05:11. > :05:16.innovation, but also getting an outstanding scholar ineffichency and

:05:17. > :05:19.it is that balance between dnsuring we did use crime and being fiscally

:05:20. > :05:25.responsible that needs to bd taken forward? My honourable friend makes

:05:26. > :05:29.a very good point from its own position and expertise in this area.

:05:30. > :05:33.He is indeed right. The forces that are best as spending that money

:05:34. > :05:37.effectively are also of the forces best that fighting crime, which is

:05:38. > :05:41.what we want them to do. Thdre is the overall point about public

:05:42. > :05:47.spending, but the second pohnt that needs to be considered is that the

:05:48. > :05:50.formula by which the money hs allocated to individual forces is

:05:51. > :05:54.out of date and needs to be changed. This has been a long process and it

:05:55. > :05:58.is inevitable that when you change if on like this there will be

:05:59. > :06:01.winners and losers and the losers will show very loudly and the

:06:02. > :06:06.winners will keep quiet. Th`t's the phase we at the moment. The point

:06:07. > :06:11.for debate today is now that the overall amount of money avahlable to

:06:12. > :06:16.the police, nor the distribttion between the individual forcds, has

:06:17. > :06:19.yet been decided. The consultation period on the funding formula is

:06:20. > :06:24.still going on. We all know that weeks that can be applied to any

:06:25. > :06:26.formula, as well as transithonal periods and damping and manx other

:06:27. > :06:29.arcane tricks of the white cultured and I am sure they were all come

:06:30. > :06:44.into play over the coming months. With the honourable gentlem`n agree

:06:45. > :06:49.with me that the formula re`lly is grossly unfair, for example, to the

:06:50. > :06:52.West Midlands? In comparison with other police authorities, they have

:06:53. > :07:00.lost 2000 3000 policemen ovdr the last years. It is interesting, what

:07:01. > :07:03.the honourable gentleman has to say, we can all make pitches as to how

:07:04. > :07:08.the formula is unfair, and H would happily talk to him about education

:07:09. > :07:12.funding in Kent, perhaps not in this debate. All debates of this sort

:07:13. > :07:16.come down to that, where losers care more than winners. But whatdver the

:07:17. > :07:21.final result, both of the Spending Review and of the funding formula

:07:22. > :07:24.distribution, there are serhous and allying issues for police ldaders

:07:25. > :07:28.and ministers to address about the long-term viability, the wax we do

:07:29. > :07:33.policing in this country. -, underlying. Assuming we do not

:07:34. > :07:38.return to irresponsible levdls of public spending, settlements will be

:07:39. > :07:44.tight, so we need to address these underlying issues, so let md make a

:07:45. > :07:48.few suggestions. The first hs that we have only scratched the surface

:07:49. > :07:52.of the benefits of new technology, both in terms of making polhcing

:07:53. > :07:58.more effective but specific`lly in making it more cost-effective. I

:07:59. > :08:01.have mentioned body cameras, the information available on

:08:02. > :08:06.smartphones, that can save time and therefore money. There are huge

:08:07. > :08:09.savings in police time to bd made in better use of technology throughout

:08:10. > :08:14.the criminal justice system, especially with regard to police

:08:15. > :08:18.attendance at court. The daxs when a police officer wastes a day at court

:08:19. > :08:22.waiting to give routine evidence for five minutes should already be over.

:08:23. > :08:26.Evidence can be given by video link or recorded on video at the time of

:08:27. > :08:30.arrest and charge. Faxes and photo copying should be things of the past

:08:31. > :08:34.in a digital age. The piece of paper which goes missing from a btndle of

:08:35. > :08:37.evidence or is not sent to the defence, causing trials to be

:08:38. > :08:42.adjourned and days wasted, that should be playing no part in the

:08:43. > :08:48.modern system. Victims off ly time, I can't! Every second counts as

:08:49. > :08:51.well! The second area is th`t we have read nothing like the full

:08:52. > :08:59.benefits of collaboration bdtween forces. Economic necessity has

:09:00. > :09:02.forced useful collaboration between neighbouring forces providing more

:09:03. > :09:03.effective policing at less cost Specialist units, like fire`rms

:09:04. > :09:09.mounted police or dog handldrs, can mounted police or dog handldrs, can

:09:10. > :09:11.be shared. There needs to bd more of this, but there needs to be a

:09:12. > :09:16.radical change in procurement radical change in procurement

:09:17. > :09:20.policies, national contracts for repairing police cars, and hndeed

:09:21. > :09:23.buying them. Clearly, computer systems ought to be able to talk to

:09:24. > :09:27.each other in the way that they cannot now. There is great scope for

:09:28. > :09:32.better and more collaboration between the different blue light

:09:33. > :09:35.services. This is going to be a huge area of useful cooperation hn the

:09:36. > :09:39.future. And the final suggestion I would make is that some force

:09:40. > :09:46.mergers are inevitable and should be made easier. I completely agree with

:09:47. > :09:50.the Home Secretary that the top down blueprint of the type that previous

:09:51. > :09:55.home secretaries have proposed is not the way to go. But many sensible

:09:56. > :09:58.people would argue that in the case of some individual forces, there is

:09:59. > :10:01.a logic that says they should merge with their neighbours, and H have

:10:02. > :10:06.heard that argument advanced by police and crime commissiondrs.

:10:07. > :10:10.Policing is always difficult, and so is making policy for police. I think

:10:11. > :10:15.the Home Secretary has a record she can be proud of, and I hope she will

:10:16. > :10:21.build on this with further radical reform in the future, because the

:10:22. > :10:25.police needed. The wisdom and strength of the opposition

:10:26. > :10:30.resolution was proved by thd novel decision by the Leicester police,

:10:31. > :10:33.who recently decided on an experiment in which they decided to

:10:34. > :10:39.investigate burglaries that took place only in those houses that had

:10:40. > :10:43.order numbers. If the house had an even number, it wasn't

:10:44. > :10:50.investigated, and this news was welcomed with great gratitude by the

:10:51. > :10:54.Leicester branch of the burglars and footpads community, but less popular

:10:55. > :11:00.with the residents of Leicester who live in houses with even nulbers. I

:11:01. > :11:05.want to pay tribute, and it is very difficult, to the late Mich`el

:11:06. > :11:09.winner on the subject today, about recalling and commemorating the

:11:10. > :11:13.deaths of policemen, becausd Mr Winner, who was not admirable in

:11:14. > :11:24.every way, set up a charity in which he set up the established mdmorials

:11:25. > :11:31.in the course of duty, and we do not use these anniversaries to `chieve

:11:32. > :11:35.political benefit for ourselves The reason we wear our poppies hs that

:11:36. > :11:41.we want to genuinely mourn for the deaths of those who have given their

:11:42. > :11:45.lives in warfare and learn the lessons accordingly. And it is a bit

:11:46. > :11:50.disappointing when a Prime Linister accuses us of using the Armhstice

:11:51. > :11:55.ceremony for political purposes when he started Prime Minister's

:11:56. > :12:00.Questions today by using thd Armistice service in order to school

:12:01. > :12:08.in a futile point against the leader of the Labour Party. -- score. The

:12:09. > :12:11.point I want to make today hs one involving Daniel Morgan, solething

:12:12. > :12:15.that is endemic to the statd of the police force, and of enormots

:12:16. > :12:20.importance. He lived on the edge of my constituency. He was a

:12:21. > :12:26.37-year-old private investigator, and he was working in London on a

:12:27. > :12:33.job to investigate police corruption. He was found de`d 2

:12:34. > :12:37.years ago in a pub car park in south London. His brother, who I spoke to

:12:38. > :12:43.yesterday, has been carrying out a campaign in all these years to

:12:44. > :12:48.expose what happened and thd reason for the murder that took pl`ce. He

:12:49. > :12:54.is still unhappy and quite rightly so. I am one of the few backbenchers

:12:55. > :12:58.with the opportunity of reading an amazing document called Operation

:12:59. > :13:03.Tiberias, and I commend anyone who has the opportunity to do it. We

:13:04. > :13:06.were allowed to read it, two members of the Home Affairs Committde, with

:13:07. > :13:11.a policeman standing next to us making sure we were not takhng

:13:12. > :13:17.notes, mobile phones were t`ken away, so we could not see it, and we

:13:18. > :13:21.read it, under those very strict conditions. You are not allowed to

:13:22. > :13:27.know what is in this operathon, and I am bound by the secrecy I gave at

:13:28. > :13:32.the time not to reveal what I've read in there, but I can fedl what

:13:33. > :13:40.the independent newspaper h`s said about operation Tiberius, and it is

:13:41. > :13:45.terrifying. What they reveal in that document is that corruption in the

:13:46. > :13:53.police force, in the Met, is endemic and has been for many years, on a

:13:54. > :13:58.scale that is staggering. I have always had... I am listening very

:13:59. > :14:03.carefully to what he said, because I recently had the privilege of

:14:04. > :14:06.meeting Daniel Morgan's brother and he has campaigned with unbelievable

:14:07. > :14:13.courage over the years, and I want him to be under no doubt th`t I am

:14:14. > :14:15.calling for more resources for our police, but that doesn't me`n we do

:14:16. > :14:21.not learn the lessons of wh`t happened at Hillsborough, at

:14:22. > :14:24.Orgreave, at Shrewsbury, in the case of Daniel Morgan, because wd must

:14:25. > :14:29.hold that mirror to the past if we are to build a police of is ready

:14:30. > :14:34.for the 21st century. I certainly far away from being anti-police I

:14:35. > :14:42.have known every police chidf con is to in my area since 1972, 43. -

:14:43. > :14:47.chief constable. All men and women of integrity, it is a fine force and

:14:48. > :14:52.has been all their time, and I was brought up in the belief th`t all

:14:53. > :14:57.policemen were like Dixon of Dock green. That is why the contdnts of

:14:58. > :15:03.the Operation Tiberius doculent is so deeply shocking. It tells the

:15:04. > :15:08.story of crimes planned by little units of police, serving police

:15:09. > :15:14.officers of various ranks, `nd criminals. And they met not in clubs

:15:15. > :15:21.or pubs, where they would bd observed, but in the branchds of a

:15:22. > :15:24.fraternity that is secret, that Jack Straw tried to persuade all police

:15:25. > :15:30.forces in the country to declare membership of that fraternity, and

:15:31. > :15:34.he was frustrated in that, because several of them refused to

:15:35. > :15:37.co-operate. I believe we have to look at Operation Tiberius. I can

:15:38. > :15:42.see no reason why it cannot be published with the names redacted.

:15:43. > :15:46.But the names are all there, the names of serving policemen, names of

:15:47. > :15:51.criminals, and the crimes are horrendous! The crimes are plotting

:15:52. > :15:56.crimes, organising crimes, carrying out crimes, covering up criles, and

:15:57. > :16:02.using people who were corrupted in all branches of government. And the

:16:03. > :16:08.report, it exists, it is thdre, it is deeply serious. And Alistair

:16:09. > :16:10.Morgan, and we can look at the other example of this, the worrying

:16:11. > :16:16.example otherwise of this is the murder of Stephen Lawrence, and how

:16:17. > :16:21.the police certainly tried to protect the perpetrators of that

:16:22. > :16:25.dreadful murder. And the pohnt I wish to make today is that we

:16:26. > :16:29.recognise the great problem that exists, does it still exist? I have

:16:30. > :16:34.rated at the Home Affairs Committee with Bernard Hogan-Howe, and he

:16:35. > :16:39.generously admitted that thd issue is one of great seriousness, and

:16:40. > :16:48.many people believe that thd problem still exists. The report, it was

:16:49. > :16:52.leaked to the Independent all those years ago, and there is even a

:16:53. > :16:56.significant thing about the report, because it covers many parts of

:16:57. > :17:01.London but not south London, where Daniel Morgan was murdered. The

:17:02. > :17:06.suggestion is that there was some corruption there. I would ask the

:17:07. > :17:10.Home Secretary and ministers to examine this report, find ott if it

:17:11. > :17:19.is true, if the contemporarx situation in the Met is one in which

:17:20. > :17:23.endemic corruption still flourishes. Thank you for calling me, M`dam

:17:24. > :17:28.Deputy Speaker, in this important debate. I am proud to be spdaking as

:17:29. > :17:32.the second Member of Parlialent for Kent to contribute, crackles were

:17:33. > :17:35.proud to have a very effecthve police force that has faced some of

:17:36. > :17:41.the greatest challenges that the nation has struggled with. ,-

:17:42. > :17:46.because we are proud. We talked about migrants coming over, 900 per

:17:47. > :17:50.month, and dealing with the immediacy that being a front-line

:17:51. > :17:54.county in our great kingdom means. I am extremely proud of his work,

:17:55. > :18:01.because what he has done is something quite remarkable. He has

:18:02. > :18:04.managed to increase the number of the proportion of warranted officers

:18:05. > :18:10.on a front-line to the highdst level in six years, and now at 92$. Now,

:18:11. > :18:16.that is a phenomenal achievdment. There are still 3000 or so warranted

:18:17. > :18:21.officers in the county, and 352 PCSOs, and they do a fantastic job.

:18:22. > :18:25.So when I hear the other side bad-mouthing them or accusing them

:18:26. > :18:28.of failing in their duties, I feel personally offended for thel,

:18:29. > :18:35.because they are doing an alazing duty. These individuals, in my own

:18:36. > :18:41.particular area, in Tonbridge, have done fantastically well. Thd West

:18:42. > :18:44.Kent divisional commander is Chief Superintendent Julia Chapman, and

:18:45. > :18:51.she has led a team that has done fantastic work around the area, and

:18:52. > :18:56.she is ably supported by two district commanders, chief

:18:57. > :19:02.inspectors Jill Ellis and Roscoe Walford. Sadly, Jill is movhng on,

:19:03. > :19:06.but I must say I wish every good wish in her future career, `nd I am

:19:07. > :19:11.very sorry that she is not staying in Tonbridge, where she has done

:19:12. > :19:14.such fantastic work. They h`ve done incredibly well. I would like to

:19:15. > :19:24.highlight one of the PCSOs who has done fantastically in Westmorland.

:19:25. > :19:27.Philip Arison has been the PCSO and Judy on a member on Sunday now for

:19:28. > :19:34.at least three years, probably more. -- on duty. Very quietly, like

:19:35. > :19:38.so many PCSOs, he will be c`rrying out his duties armed only whth this

:19:39. > :19:43.strength of character and hhs personality, and he will do

:19:44. > :19:48.phenomenally well as he does it I am absolutely delighted to hear a

:19:49. > :19:52.tribute to PCSOs, because I think they are one of the best thhngs we

:19:53. > :19:57.did as a Labour government, and he will share my despair and horror at

:19:58. > :20:04.seeing so many of them cut `round the country, because they do so much

:20:05. > :20:09.important work, freeing up other officers, I appreciate his support

:20:10. > :20:14.for a Labour policy! I am h`ppy to welcome Labour policies when they

:20:15. > :20:18.work, and PCSOs were a brilliant invention. I appreciate the amount

:20:19. > :20:21.of work that has been done hn ensuring that they have every

:20:22. > :20:26.opportunity not only to serve in their current roles but be promoted

:20:27. > :20:31.into warranted service if they wish to, and indeed many do. I al

:20:32. > :20:34.grateful that PCSO Harrison will be there, because these individuals

:20:35. > :20:39.across Kent, this whole teal, have seen a reduction in crime of 6%

:20:40. > :20:45.Now, I know that that is not just down to them alone. It is down to a

:20:46. > :20:47.network, and that network, of course, starred in Kent and spreads

:20:48. > :20:58.to the whole of the United Kingdom. That corporation has done an amazing

:20:59. > :21:05.amount to ensure the people in Kent are safe. We have been innovative in

:21:06. > :21:09.introducing new technologies and I'm grateful my honourable friend has

:21:10. > :21:18.mentioned some of those innovations, I would like to raise one of them.

:21:19. > :21:25.In January, Kent Police introduced Track My Crime. It has steal at the

:21:26. > :21:28.time taken for a crime report reduced radically, and has hncreased

:21:29. > :21:35.the satisfaction of those rdporting crime. It is fantastic, a mhxed

:21:36. > :21:41.blessing, 3000 people have been victims of crime and have used it.

:21:42. > :21:47.The satisfaction levels havd been very good. The presence of police

:21:48. > :21:51.isn't just about individuals know about bricks and mortar, though I do

:21:52. > :21:54.know the important decisions that will be taken over the location of

:21:55. > :21:59.police stations over coming years will be one we are all taking

:22:00. > :22:02.seriously and for my own sake, I know the police station in Tonbridge

:22:03. > :22:08.and West morning are extremdly important. I welcome the work done

:22:09. > :22:13.in the outrage, as so many police are now operating from council

:22:14. > :22:19.offices, supermarkets or mobile police stations, but it's not just

:22:20. > :22:23.about that. It's also about the work that is done across our whole nation

:22:24. > :22:28.and that's why I'm going to take a few moments to welcome the report

:22:29. > :22:33.that was introduced to this house earlier today. The new investigatory

:22:34. > :22:39.Powers act is essential, it is essential for ensuring that the

:22:40. > :22:42.intelligence the police need to do their job is available to them,

:22:43. > :22:47.essential to ensure that our intelligence services can cooperate

:22:48. > :22:52.effectively with the police so we can have the kind of integr`ted

:22:53. > :22:56.defence network we need to dnsure that our communities are safe, not

:22:57. > :23:01.only from terrorism, violent crime and indeed child pornographx and

:23:02. > :23:06.paedophilia but also from run-of-the-mill crimes that sadly

:23:07. > :23:11.blight the lives of so many of our constituents. I'm delighted that

:23:12. > :23:18.Bill is now before the housd and will soon, I hope, become an actor.

:23:19. > :23:24.The last thing I would like to say is welcome the democratisathon of

:23:25. > :23:27.the police force we have sedn under this government. I'm probably the

:23:28. > :23:32.only one in Kent who can sax this but welcome the new police `nd crime

:23:33. > :23:39.commission. This is not a universal statement in Kent, but at ldast we

:23:40. > :23:47.know in Kent now who is takhng the decisions. A few years ago, I will

:23:48. > :23:51.give way... Just to make thd point that we do know who is making the

:23:52. > :23:55.decisions, we can hold the police and crime commission to account

:23:56. > :24:00.important in that before shd became Commissioner, she chaired the police

:24:01. > :24:05.authority so she was doing roughly the same job only with no ptblic

:24:06. > :24:13.accountability. There can't be a better example. He's right. He

:24:14. > :24:21.speaks for me because that's exactly what I was going to say. Very well.

:24:22. > :24:26.Knowing now who actually takes the decisions on police priorithes,

:24:27. > :24:29.knowing now that they take the decisions on the location of police

:24:30. > :24:35.stations, the priority of innovation, it is essential that

:24:36. > :24:40.when we get to the elections, as in my area they will shortly bd, in

:24:41. > :24:44.2016, it's important that wd really focus on who they want. These

:24:45. > :24:48.decisions are no longer for anonymous apparatchiks who hold

:24:49. > :24:53.secrets way over our policing, they are for people who are empowered

:24:54. > :24:56.with the huge burden of responsibility and I welcomd very

:24:57. > :25:01.much the quality of candidates stepping forward on the conservative

:25:02. > :25:03.side and I hope that there will be excellent candidate from thd other

:25:04. > :25:07.side as well, because we nedd the best candidates for this job, not

:25:08. > :25:14.party political, the best candidates. I'm delighted to say we

:25:15. > :25:17.have put forward some of those. In conclusion I would like to say that

:25:18. > :25:22.the growth in interest, technology, should continue to stop this is not

:25:23. > :25:27.a process that is going to stop but will in fact exonerate. As the

:25:28. > :25:35.criminals exploit ever greater technological innovation, whether

:25:36. > :25:43.Sigrid messaging through Facebook Messenger, as they exploit online

:25:44. > :25:47.banking for greater fraud it is right that our police step hnto that

:25:48. > :26:01.world and our security servhces help them. I welcome the work on that and

:26:02. > :26:05.also the Home Secretary. I will declare from the outset, I grew up

:26:06. > :26:10.in a policing household. My dad is a retired police Sergeant, ond of West

:26:11. > :26:13.Yorkshire Police's finest, `nd I'm proud of all the achieved in the

:26:14. > :26:20.police but he would be the first to tell you it doesn't -- he doesn t

:26:21. > :26:26.recognise the Labour force. As crime has changed, so has policing. As new

:26:27. > :26:32.evils manifest themselves, we have had to adapt to protect those we

:26:33. > :26:40.serve. This bill is not likd others. I have been keen to bang the

:26:41. > :26:43.drum for Halifax, to speak `bout the potential for jobs and growth, to

:26:44. > :26:47.speak with pride but would we have got right, what we had to offer and

:26:48. > :26:53.bring in the investment and tourism we need to prosper. I would not be a

:26:54. > :26:57.credible MP if I only spoke about the positives the expense of

:26:58. > :27:04.difficult issues, that I ch`llenge and pose a danger to the well-being

:27:05. > :27:10.of some of the most vulnerable. The EDL marched in Halifax this year.

:27:11. > :27:13.They were there to protest `bout child grooming gangs and it

:27:14. > :27:18.highlighted to me early on, the value of local informed and familiar

:27:19. > :27:23.neighbourhood policing teams. We have had with greatest numbdrs of

:27:24. > :27:28.arrests in the country in connection with child sexual exploitathon in

:27:29. > :27:34.Calderdale. With the declind in certain types of criminal activity,

:27:35. > :27:37.honourable friends, prior to my collection, medals from Rotherham,

:27:38. > :27:44.Rochdale and others will know just how complexity it is to tackle.

:27:45. > :27:47.According to the NSPCC, all four countries in the UK have sedn the

:27:48. > :27:52.number of recorded sexual offences against children increase over the

:27:53. > :27:55.last year and the top of policing required to identify, disrupt and

:27:56. > :27:59.prosecute those seeking to dxploit children and young people is

:28:00. > :28:05.intensive, it takes care and persistent and time. There `re now

:28:06. > :28:10.957 fewer police officers in West Yorkshire, the thin blue line is

:28:11. > :28:14.thinner than ever. The worrx is that policing will become much more

:28:15. > :28:21.reactive, a blue light servhce we heard about earlier. A reactive

:28:22. > :28:23.policing of is of limited use when striving to deliver a 0 toldrance

:28:24. > :28:31.approach to child sexual exploitation. Calderdale has also

:28:32. > :28:34.been deemed vulnerable to radicalisation and I can not stress

:28:35. > :28:41.enough the importance of trtsted local neighbourhood police. Again we

:28:42. > :28:45.cannot afford a reactive approach to radicalisation. Over the last three

:28:46. > :28:52.years, terrorism related arrests have gone up by 56%. Britain's

:28:53. > :28:55.counterterrorism chief said it is an essential contribution that is made

:28:56. > :29:02.by regular officers on the beat developing richer ships with

:29:03. > :29:05.communities. -- relationships. Mainstream policing makes a

:29:06. > :29:10.significant contribution to. On the day that the EDL can the Halifax, it

:29:11. > :29:14.was thanks to local officers that the march went ahead with lhmited

:29:15. > :29:17.trouble. They knew exactly where geographical flash points would be,

:29:18. > :29:21.where the look on social media to take the temperature of the

:29:22. > :29:26.situation, they knew who to keep an eye on where they were likely to be.

:29:27. > :29:32.I want to thank the offices who were on duty that day for the work they

:29:33. > :29:40.do everyday. West Yorkshire Police has weathered the cuts... I will

:29:41. > :29:46.carry on. Was that an intervention? West Yorkshire Place has we`thered

:29:47. > :29:50.the cut so far, but you will appreciate my anxiety about another

:29:51. > :29:55.round of cuts as devastating as 25 to 40%. Neighbourhood policd are at

:29:56. > :30:00.the forefront of identifying vulnerabilities, frustrations and

:30:01. > :30:02.causes for concern in communities and individuals before

:30:03. > :30:07.radicalisation starts to manifest itself in an almost irreversible

:30:08. > :30:10.way. We will lose the ability to do this profitably if there ard further

:30:11. > :30:18.cuts to West Yorkshire Police or any force for that matter. I just

:30:19. > :30:23.mention CSOs, in 2013 The Home Office said, since their

:30:24. > :30:28.introduction in 2002, P CSOs provide an invaluable link between the

:30:29. > :30:33.police and the communities they serve, bringing skills and

:30:34. > :30:38.diversity. They have proven to be an effective way of building trust

:30:39. > :30:42.within communities, building the gap -- bridging the gap. Gatherhng

:30:43. > :30:48.information in a way that officers may not otherwise be able to. West

:30:49. > :30:54.Yorkshire Police has lost 137 of them since 2010, an increasd of 80%.

:30:55. > :30:58.The Home Office has acknowlddged the invaluable link between polhce and

:30:59. > :31:03.community is delivered by them and must recognise that further cuts. To

:31:04. > :31:07.diminish that link. Given the changes in crime, not only the

:31:08. > :31:10.capacities of tackling radicalisation and child sexual

:31:11. > :31:15.expectation but also the urgency by which we must carry out that work, I

:31:16. > :31:18.urge the government to think carefully about how it reconciled

:31:19. > :31:25.proposed cuts to services whth its responsibility to keep people safe.

:31:26. > :31:31.I'm very pleased to begin to this debate about policing, I'm ` common

:31:32. > :31:39.law barrister by training as I should probably declare at the

:31:40. > :31:43.outset. -- criminal barristdr. I have persecuted numbers of cases and

:31:44. > :31:47.I know as well as anyone th`t our justice system owes an enorlous debt

:31:48. > :31:51.of gratitude to our police officers and in particular those who carry

:31:52. > :31:55.out their duties with tenachty but always tempered by fairness, because

:31:56. > :31:59.I believe our best police officers, particularly the ones I havd worked

:32:00. > :32:03.with in counterterrorism and homicide, embody the finest

:32:04. > :32:06.traditions of British polichng, a determination to pursue linds of

:32:07. > :32:12.enquiry, wherever they may lead and to get to the truth, however

:32:13. > :32:14.inconvenient that may be. The officers I worked with are without

:32:15. > :32:21.doubt among the finest you will find anywhere. The background to this

:32:22. > :32:25.debate is because they and other public services have faced `

:32:26. > :32:29.difficult funding climate, we can't get away from that. We cannot forget

:32:30. > :32:32.that despite having the fastest-growing economy in the

:32:33. > :32:39.developed world, despite having generated more jobs in the county of

:32:40. > :32:45.Yorkshire alone lasted in the entirety of France, despite having

:32:46. > :32:50.created more implement in the young, we are still running a

:32:51. > :32:53.significant deficit. -- mord implement. That is a real and

:32:54. > :32:58.present danger to our financial stability. It is also right to say

:32:59. > :33:05.that if we don't get that under control, it will do nothing for the

:33:06. > :33:12.crime levels we want to see as low as they are. Nor would it allow us,

:33:13. > :33:16.if we don't get it under control, to plough more money into our NHS and

:33:17. > :33:22.protect our schools. How have the police responded to this funding

:33:23. > :33:25.climate? They have risen to the challenge magnificently. Crhme has

:33:26. > :33:33.fallen since 2010, they havd been 2.9 million fewer crimes, 189,0 0

:33:34. > :33:42.fewer burglaries and 465,000 fewer violent offences. There is ` fall of

:33:43. > :33:48.8% in the year to the end of 20 5. In my own county, crime is down by

:33:49. > :33:51.18%, a tribute to the policd officers who have shown such

:33:52. > :33:54.resourcefulness and dedicathon in serving the people of

:33:55. > :33:58.Gloucestershire and my constituency of Cheltenham in particular. It s

:33:59. > :34:01.worth noting that those stunning force of been achieved in the

:34:02. > :34:07.context of much improved reporting culture, people feeling better able

:34:08. > :34:16.to report crime, particularly sexual offences. The honourable melber

:34:17. > :34:21.asserts that crime is falling, can I quote from the City of London Police

:34:22. > :34:25.Commissioner, who is the National fraud coordinator, when he says in

:34:26. > :34:32.the circular to all GCCs and Constable start shortly, thd crime

:34:33. > :34:37.service for England and Walds will include an extra 3 million Ford and

:34:38. > :34:44.cyber incidents, reflecting for the first time the changing and true

:34:45. > :34:50.nature of crime, and in his words, an increase of up to 14%. Hd is

:34:51. > :34:56.right that crime is changing, that is something I will come onto. But

:34:57. > :35:00.the truth is, the inconvenidnt truth for the benches opposite, that the

:35:01. > :35:04.figures that are being cited are the very figures that Labour were

:35:05. > :35:08.relying on themselves, the independent crime survey for England

:35:09. > :35:12.and Wales. It's no good to say, we relied upon those in the past but we

:35:13. > :35:16.won't now because they are inconvenient, there has to be